(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Personal Memoir of the Bertholf Years, 1958-1968"

A Personal Memoir I 

of the Bertholf Years 

at Illinois Wesleyan University 

1958-68 




Lloyd M. Bertholf 
President Emeritus 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/personalmemoirofOObert 



A 

PERSONAL 

MEMOIR 

OF THE 

BERTHOLF YEARS 

AT 

ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY 
1958-1968 



by 

Lloyd M. Bertholf 
President Emeritus 



Illinois Wesleyan University 

Bloomington, Illinois 61702 

1984 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Chapter 1. The Election of a New President 1 

Chapter 2. The First Year (1958-59) 4 

Chapter 3. Financial Changes 18 

Chapter 4. Development of the Physical Plant 23 

Chapter 5. Academic Changes 44 

Chapter 6. Presidential Relationships 57 

Chapter 7. Summary 78 

Index 89 



in 



PREFACE 

This is not a historian's history of Illinois Wesleyan University 
during the 1958-1968 decade. It is not well documented with foot- 
notes and references. It is not unbiased. It is not strictly chrono- 
logical. 

It is rather a series of personal memoirs of things that happened 
at the school during my presidency, and of many of the persons 
involved. My training has been in science rather than history. 
Writing is not easy for me. This project, started some three years 
after I retired from office, has extended over another ten years, 
and during that time, as so often happens, it is the pleasant things, 
the successful things, the self-complimentary things that tend to be 
remembered. 

Although I have tried to be fair to my colleagues and to my 
predecessors, I am sure that much more of the credit for the 
advances made belong to them than my words here will indicate. 
And although I have not entirely overlooked the frustrations and 
disappointments, the reader will doubtless conclude that this was 
a happier and more successful decade than is justified by the 
actual facts. 

Having admitted all of the above, I am nevertheless fairly well 
satisfied that what I have recorded here is true. I have taken pains 
to check data rather carefully — data which I obtained from a 
review of the Minutes of trustee meetings and faculty meetings; of 
my tri-annual Reports to the Board of Trustees; of the weekly 
Faculty Bulletin issues; of the weekly student newspaper, The 
Argus; of the Illinois Wesleyan University Bulletin, published 
usually five times a year; the annual University Catalog; and of my 
own diary and personal files. I have had much help from Univer- 
sity officials and secretaries and from colleagues who have read 
portions of the manuscript. 

Lloyd M. Bertholf , 
March 1,1984 



1 



THE ELECTION 

OF A NEW PRESIDENT 



The first intimation that I was being considered for the 
presidency of Illinois Wesleyan University came to me when I was 
serving as academic vice president of the College of the Pacific, 
Stockton, California. It came in the form of a letter from the Rev. 
Dr. Raye Ragan, chairman of the search committee of the Board of 
Trustees of Illinois Wesleyan. This letter, dated May 20, 1957, 
announced the planned retirement of President Merrill J. Holmes 
about 14 months later, i.e. July 31, 1958. It said that my name had 
been suggested by "an influential and mutual friend,"* and asked 
permission to include it in "a small preferred list of nominees for 
careful consideration." 

I gave a rather noncommital reply, but said that since I planned 
to attend the National Conference of Methodist Men at Purdue 
University, Lafayette, Indiana, on July 19-21, 1957, 1 could probably 
arrange to stop in Bloomington, if he wished, on my way back to 
California. 

So, it was arranged, and in due time I found myself in 
Bloomington, registered at the old Rogers Hotel. Next morning Dr. 
Holmes met me, took me to the campus, and conducted me through 
a very interesting day-and-a-half of conferences and meetings 
with administrative officers, faculty, and trustees, though not 
many of the faculty were there in Bloomington in the middle of the 
summer. 

I learned many things. I learned, for example, that the Univer- 
sity was 107 years old, had about 1200 students, and that Dr. 
Holmes had been president since 1947, having been advanced to 
that position from the vice presidency after the sudden death of 
President William E. Shaw on February 22 of that year. The 
campus, located on Main Street some 10 blocks north of the Court 
House, consisted of about 25 acres, on which were 17 academic 
buildings (among about 100 large elm trees and a few black 
walnuts) plus several fraternity and sorority houses, a heating 
plant, a number of faculty homes, and several temporary war- 
surplus buildings used for offices and as apartments for married 
students. The library consisted of approximately 54,000 volumes. 
The total assets of the University were about $7,000,000, consisting 
of buildings, grounds, and equipment valued at $4,500,000 and 
endowment of $2,500,000. There was an indebtedness of nearly 
$1,000,000. 

Academically, the University seemed to enjoy a good reputation, 
for it had not only been given the usual North Central Association 

* I later learned that the "influential and mutual friend" was the late Dr. John O. 
Gross of the Methodist Board of Education, Nashville, Tennessee. 



regional accreditation for many years, but in addition held the 
prestigious approval of the Association of American Universities. 

I liked what I saw and heard at Illinois Wesleyan, and was 
pleased with the openness and frankness of the people who inter- 
viewed me. But I did not permit myself to consider very seriously 
the possibility of my going there, for I knew there were others 
being considered. Also, I was very happy at the College of the 
Pacific, and was not at all sure that I wanted to exchange an 
academic vice presidency for a job which entailed responsibility 
for an entire institution. 

It came as a considerable surprise, therefore, when on 
September 12 I received a telephone call from Dr. Ragan and Mr. 
Ned Dolan, the latter being president of the IWU Board of 
Trustees. They told me that I had become the unanimous choice of 
the search committee, and asked me if I would accept the position 
if elected. This plunged my wife and me into the deepest sort of 
prayerful consideration for the next six days. The scales seemed to 
tip first one way and then the other. What gave the final push in 




"*S\ : -'K; : ■■■"; *^;!ffl 




4 




#if 






Dr. Lloyd M. 




Bertholf 14th 




President of 


tf°^ ■ 


Illinois Wesleyan 


^- 


University, in 




robes ofoffiee 




with presidential 




medallion. 


iMfe^ 


(On the cover: 


laM*"' " * * 


the official 


|?f<# 


presidential 


S' ! '- ; ""SS?&-, i 


portrait 




painted by 




Annette Sayler.) 



favor of accepting, I think, was the conversation we had with Dr. 
and Mrs. Thomas Lugg of Evanston. Dr. Lugg was at that time 
treasurer of the Methodist Church, and a member of the IWU 
Board of Trustees, and I learned that just at that time he and Mrs. 
Lugg happened to be in San Francisco for a meeting. Accordingly, I 
called his hotel and got an appointment, and Martha and I went in 
to see them. The picture of the University which Dr. Lugg 
presented, the dreams he had for its future, and the obvious 
sincerity of his support did much to convince us both that this was 
a Divine call for me. So, on September 18 I wrote Dr. Ragan saying 
that I would accept the presidency if elected. 

The next meeting of the Board of Trustees was scheduled for 
October 22, 1957, and it was arranged that my wife and I would 
come to Bloomington that day, when the formal election would 
take place. Everything went according to schedule. I was present 
at the Board meeting and heard the search committee make its 
report, submitting my name as its only nomination. I was asked to 
leave the room for a few minutes, and on my return was told that 
the report had been approved and that I was elected the 
fourteenth president, to take office on the following August 1. All 
eyes turned to me, of course, and I realized, really for the first 
time, that I was expected to make a sort of "acceptance speech," 
and I was totally unprepared. The only response I could think of, 
on the spur of the moment, was the story of the one-string-cello 
player.* So I arose, and after a few words of thanks, told that 
story — then sat down. It was only years later that I heard the 
sequel to this event: It seems that when the meeting broke up, one 
of the Board members turned to another and said: "We thought we 
were getting an ace for a president, but it looks like we got the 
joker." 

In the nine months that followed, President Holmes was very 
gracious in sharing with me quite frankly the many questions that 
kept coming up for decision — questions of budget, of alumni rela- 
tions, of curriculum, of faculty appointments, etc. I made two or 
three visits to the campus during this period, and he visited me at 
least once in Stockton. As a result, I felt fairly well oriented when 
on July 30, 1958, my wife and I arrived in Bloomington preparatory 
to my taking over the reins on August 1. 



* The story tells of a would-be musician who finally realized a life-long ambition by 
inheriting a cello. Not knowing anything much about the instrument, he started 
his practice by tuning up only one string, and then began sawing away continuous- 
ly with his bow on only that one string and with his finger on only one place on the 
finger-board. His wife endured this for a few days, but finally could stand it no 
longer. "Why don't you use all the strings, and move your fingers up and down to 
different places, like other cello players do?" she demanded. "Ah," he replied, 
"they are looking for the place; I have found it." 




THE FIRST YEAR 
(1958-59) 

Martha and I arrived in Bloomington on July 30, 1958, after a 
drive across country from Stockton, California. The president's 
house had been vacated by Dr. and Mrs Holmes, but there were a 
few changes being made (closets, etc.) in accordance with our 
requests, so we were given temporary quarters in Pfeiffer Hall for 
the few days required to complete these changes, and for our fur- 
niture to arrive. 




The Bertholfs at the door of the Presidents House. 



Meanwhile, I was getting acquainted with my office and my staff 
in "Duration Hall."* Although the office was certainly nothing to 
be proud of, I soon came to be very proud indeed of the staff I had 
inherited from Dr. Holmes. 

* "Duration Hall" was the roofed-over, partially underground, first floor of the old 
Hedding Hall which had burned in 1943. It had been converted into use as 
administrative offices "for the duration" until more adequate quarters could be 
provided, and this "duration" had extended by this time for 15 years! By the time 
I arrived, however, plans had been virtually completed for the construction of a 
new administration building, so the end of the "duration" was at last in sight. 



There was, first of all, my secretary, Ruth Ward. Quiet, pleasant, 
modest, efficient, knowledgeable, well organized, loyal, and intel- 
ligent, she did more than anyone else to orient me to my routine 
duties, and I came to depend on her implicitly during my entire 10- 
year tenure. 

The dean of the University was Dr. William T. Beadles. Bill was 
a man of about my own age, who had been at the University, either 
as a student or a teacher, practically all of his life. In spite of his 
great knowledge of everything that had transpired at the institu- 
tion for some 40 years, however, he was very respectful of his new 
"boss," and patiently dealt with the sometimes impulsive and 
unworkable suggestions which I tended to make out of my own 
long "deaning" experience. Bill soon let me know that he had no 
ambitions to climb the administrative ladder — in fact, that he 
preferred to cast his lot permanently in the teaching field where 
he had already made an enviable reputation as insurance 
educator. Hence, I was privileged to have his services only one 
year as dean, but did profit by the credit that came to the Univer- 
sity through his teaching services throughout his 10 years. 

As a successor to Dr. Beadles in the deanship, I was able in the 
summer of 1959 to secure Dr. John Sylvester Smith, who had been 
serving as dean at Dillard University, New Orleans, Louisiana. Dr. 
Smith was a remarkably gifted man in many ways, and served 
well, I thought, for the two years he was with us. That he did not fit 
entirely into our situation became evident, however (to my col- 
leagues more than to me, I must say), and in 1961 we were for- 
tunate to get Dr. Everette Walker to replace Dr. Smith. Dr. Walker 
had been serving for several years on the staff of the Methodist 
Department of Secondary and Higher Education for the National 
Board of Education in Nashville, Tennessee, and was quite 
familiar with Illinois Wesleyan from having been a student here 
for a while, and from having served on a survey team sent here by 
the University Senate of the Methodist Church in 1957. He became 
at home in our situation at once, therefore, and did an excellent 
job as dean, working together with me in fine harmony during the 
last seven years of my presidency. He was creative, considerate, 
clean living, cooperative, a good listener, hard working and effec- 
tive. 

My director of development was Dr. George T. Oborn. George 
was an ordained Methodist minister, but his academic field was 
history, and he first came to Wesleyan as a history teacher in 1946. 
In 1953, however, he was persuaded to take over the fund-raising 
job, and by 1958 had had five years of very successful development 
experience, working always in close cooperation with President 
Holmes. George was highly methodical, with a fine mind for 
detail. He was a hard-working student of tax laws, and though he 
carefully avoided posing as a lawyer, nevertheless soon came to be 
looked upon as an authority in charitable giving and estate plan- 
ning. If a donor had something of value in his estate that he wished 



to give to Wesleyan, George could be depended on to find a way 
for the gift to be made, with minimum loss to the estate's residual 
value. 

The business manager was Philip W. Kasch, who came to the 
University in 1948. Phil, I found, had a remarkably broad concept 
of his job. He was dedicated to the task of making the University 
function as an educational institution, not simply as a business 
operation. Money was a means to that end, not an end in itself. I 
soon came to stand in considerable awe of him, for he had exper- 
tise in areas of budgeting, accounting, investment, purchasing, 
contracting, maintenance, personnel management, etc. — areas in 
which I was a rank amateur. Yet he was careful not to flaunt his 
knowledge; rather, he was the respectful servant of the University, 
and the president was the boss.* How grateful I am to him, not only 
for what he taught me but also for his adroit financial planning and 
management which brought us through every one of my 10 years 
without a deficit. 

Another business office man who gave me much willing help 
was the comptroller, Max Starkey. There simply has to be a person 
like Max in every well-run organization of any considerable size — 
a person who never seeks the limelight but who is always ready 
with the data that you need, responds instantly to any request you 
may make, can be counted on to carry through with the job 
assigned, works not by the clock but by the requirements of the 
task at hand, and who does it all so cheerfully that he makes you 
believe it's fun. That was Max Starkey, and I shall ever be grateful 
for the support he seemed always so glad to give. Another business 
office person that stands out in my mind from that first year was 
the very pleasant and accommodating Mildred Buchholz. 

The dean of students was Miss Anne Meierhof er. She had come 
to Wesleyan in 1946 as dean of women, but after a few years was 
given the more comprehensive title. Anne had the happy faculty of 
being able to enter into the lives of students, their concerns and 
problems, as if these were her very own affairs. She was thus able 
to maintain rapport with students in almost every sort of situation 
and could exercise guidance in a way that young people did not 
resent. I found her to be very level-headed, and a stabilizing voice 
in my cabinet when we were dealing with critical decision- 
making. 

Another important person in my cabinet was Lee W. Short, 
director of admission. Lee was a great idea-man. He was always 
thinking up new ways to advertise the University, new reasons for 



* The role of the president as the "power figure" on campus was something for 
which I was largely unprepared. I had never thought of myself as a person of any 
great authority, and to have my suggestions adopted at once and without argument 
by many people was rather frightening — at least sobering. It happens to all newly 
elected executives, presumably, and we all get used to it far faster than we 
should, but I tried to slow down the process and to avoid being a "stuffed shirt" as 
long as possible. 

6 



bringing prospective students to the campus, new devices for tell- 
ing our story to the local business and professional men, new ideas 
for Homecoming or Alumni Days, new ways of making our catalog 
and other literature more attractive. He was himself an alumnus of 
the University and his loyalty to the institution and its program 
knew no bounds. That was probably the main secret of his success 
as an admission and public relations officer: he believed 
wholeheartedly in the thing he was "selling." 

Another administrative person whom I found on the job when I 
arrived deserves special mention, and that was Joseph Kelley, 
registrar. Joe was also an IWU alumnus, class of 1939. He was 
appointed registrar in 1956, after he had had a stint in the Air 
Force and some 10 years in public school teaching, coaching, and 
administration. Joe knew every student by name, I think, and they 
trusted him, for he not only ran an efficient registration office but 
entered freely into campus activities, especially athletics. He 
became a popular referee for high school football contests, and it 
was while he was traveling to officiate in such a game on the eve- 
ning of October 2, 1964, that he suffered a serious automobile acci- 
dent, and died a few days later. 

This is the tribute I wrote and published in the Faculty Bulletin 
just after Joe's funeral. 

JOSEPH DAVIES KELLEY, JR. 
1912-1964 

The entire campus community is stunned and grieved by 
the tragic death early Saturday morning of our own Joseph D. 
Kelley, University registrar. 

Joe Kelley was everybody's friend. There is hardly a one of 
us, whether a faculty member or a student, who does not owe 
a debt of gratitude to Joe for some personal kindness done, or 
certainly for an efficient service rendered by his office. He 
lived only to serve, and Illinois Wesleyan was his principal 
medium of operation. In his home, in his church, in his office 
and classroom, on the campus, and as an athletics official he 
was always the courteous gentleman, modest and quiet, but 
marvelously efficient. I fear we shall never be able to replace 
him fully, for no one man can ever do all the things he did. 

Our hearts go out in profound sympathy to Ruby and the 
other members of his family, and our gratitude goes to God 
for permitting us to know him and to have had his services for 
Wesleyan for these eight years. 

—Lloyd M. Bertholf 

I have always considered myself particularly fortunate in that I 
was spared the hassle that goes on at so many institutions over the 
prominence which football is to occupy. And the reason I was 
spared this unpleasantness was mostly the reasonableness of the 
director of athletics whom I found on the job, viz. Jack 
Horenberger. Jack was also an alumnus of the University, class of 



1936. He had returned in 1942 as a teacher and coach, and in 1957 
had been made director of athletics. Jack was an avid athlete, of 
course, with a fine record of success. But he was also eager to 
maintain the good name of the University as an educational 
institution. When the decision was made, therefore, to grant no 
more "athletic scholarships," but to base financial aid to students 
in all departments of the University solely on demonstrated finan- 
cial need, Jack and his staff went along with the plan loyally, 
although unconvinced at first of its practicality. Before many 
years, however, they became enthusiastic supporters of the idea. 
And in a field where frequent turnover of staff is more often the 
rule than the exception, I take considerable satisfaction in the fact 
that the entire staff in men's physical education and athletics has 
remained intact for all the years (even in 1980) since each man was 
appointed: Jack Horenberger in 1942, Don Larson in 1954, Bob 
Keck in 1957, and Dennis Bridges in 1964. 

Another of the group of administrators I was fortunate to 
"inherit" from Dr. Holmes was the University nurse, Miss Velma 
Arnold. She was a product of the old cooperative program we ran 
for 35 years in conjunction with the Brokaw Hospital School of 
Nursing. Miss Arnold was graduated with an R.N. and a bachelor's 
degree in the class of 1930. She started to work for IWU in 
February 1942, and for the first few years was involved in the Navy 
V-l, V-5, and V-7 programs which operated during World War II on 
the Wesleyan campus. 

Following the close of the war she continued on at the Univer- 
sity, setting up a highly successful nursing service here, one of the 
few such programs which provided for nursing visits to student 
rooms under certain conditions. 

It would be difficult to find anyone more loyal to Wesleyan than 
"Nurse Arnold" proved to be, as evidenced both by her personal 
services and her benefactions. One of the latter was the elaborate 
brick fireplace and picnic area on the campus given in 1953 as a 
memorial to her mother. Unfortunately, in 1965 this had to be 
removed to clear space for the construction of Munsell Hall; but 
the idea was preserved by the later construction of a beautiful and 
functional cabana in the outdoor space immediately west of 
Memorial Student Center. It was at about this time also that the 
trustees named the University bookstore in Velma's honor. 

One more alumnus of Wesleyan whom I found on the 
administrative staff when I arrived was Russell Troxel, class of 
1923. Russ had been lured away from public school administration 
by Dr. Holmes and named executive secretary of the Alumni 
Association the year before I arrived, and it was a happy choice. 
Russ vigorously carried on the process of organizing the alumni in 
various centers all over Illinois and all across the nation, with the 
result that when I came on the job there were literally dozens of 
groups ready for me to visit. 

This was a good staff, competent, open, friendly, and easy to 



work with. I soon came to the conclusion that I would have no dif- 
ficulty in getting along with any one of them, and that there was no 
need for the "housecleaning" that so often occurs when a new 
administrator takes office. 

I was much impressed by the quality of the faculty also, and am 
tempted here to pay tribute to almost every one of them 
individually. Obviously, that is not possible in this brief sketch. All 
I can do is to mention by name those who were here at the time I 
came, and who stands out in my mind as genuine assets to the 
University. 

First of all, there were the chairmen of the divisions and direc- 
tors of schools: William Eben Schultz in humanities (who died at 
his desk, April 16, 1964), Wayne Wantland in natural sciences, 
Bunyan Andrew in social sciences, Rupert Kilgore in art, 
Lawrence Tucker in drama, and Carl Neumeyer in music. They 
were a team that would do credit to any college in their respective 
fields, both as teachers and as administrators. 

But there were many outstanding faculty members of lesser 
rank. In the humanities, for example, there were Elizabeth Oggel, 
Lucile Klauser, Joseph and Doris Meyers, all in English; Patricia 
Deitz and Constance Ferguson in French; Pedro Labarthe in 
Spanish; Paul Hessert, James Whitehurst, and Charles Thrall in 
religion; Richard Leonard in history, and Ralph Browns 
in philosophy. In the natural sciences there were Dorothea 
Franzen in biology and Owen York in chemistry. In the social 
science I think of Oliver Luerssen in business, Emil Kauder, in 
economics, and Paul Ross and Dewey Fristoe in education. There 
were Jack Horenberger, Don Larson, and Bob Keck in men's 
physical education and Marian Niehaus and June Schultz in 
women's physical education. In political science we had Glenn 
Mower, Jr. and Donald Brown. In psychology there was Frank 
Holmes; in speech Marie Robinson and Ed Carpenter; and in 
sociology, Samuel Ratcliffe and Clark Bouwman. 

In the College of Fine Arts, besides the directors, there were 
Fred Brian and Nona Craycraft in art; in drama there was John 
Ficca; and in music there was a large list, including Dwight Drex- 
ler (piano), Henry Charles (voice), Lillian McCord (organ), Mario 
Mancinelli (violin), Varner Chance (music education), Ruth 
Erickson (voice), John McGrosso (band), Zelah Newcomb (piano 
for children), Wilbur Ogden (composition), John Silber (theory), 
Maurice Willis (wind instruments), Ruth Krieger (violoncello), 
Lewis Whikehart (choral music), and Virginia Husted (music 
history and cello). 

Those who were here in 1958 will recognize in these names a list 
of superb teachers — the primary element of greatness in any 
educational institution. I must mention also Mary Smiley in food 
services, and Chet Shiers in maintenance. How much I came to 
depend on their faithful and expert services! 

While getting acquainted with the staff, I was also making some 

9 



evaluation of the facilities of the University. By October 28, 1958, 1 
had summarized these in my mind, and used the occasion of a din- 
ner meeting of the "Illinois Wesleyan Associates" (a group of 
business and professional people in the community, plus 
administrators and faculty representatives, that had been 
organized a few years before) to set forth some long-range goals. 
The title of my address was, "Toward the Setting of Goals for 
Wesleyan's Future Course." As a "North Star" to orient us, I sug- 
gested a double-pronged goal: (a) that we should seek to turn out a 
product (our graduates) characterized by four C's — Christian 
character, comprehensively educated, competent in some chosen 
field, and committed to the service of mankind — and (b) that we 
aim to become increasingly useful to our local Bloomington- 
Normal community. In short, a good Wesleyan product and a good 
Wesleyan name. 

As specific objectives for the next five years or so, I was brash 
enough to make suggestions regarding seven areas of the Univer- 
sity's work: curriculum, library collection, religious emphasis, stu- 
dent selection, faculty recruitment, finances, and total size of the 
student body. Not all the objectives set forth that day were 
achieved; these I shall not mention, of course. Many were 
achieved, however. For example, I mentioned the need for placing 
more responsibility on students themselves for their own educa- 
tion (less lecturing and more requiring of reading and writing and 
exploring), and this is still a continuing trend in education. I spoke 
of the need for improved Wesleyan facilities for the teaching of 
languages, sciences, physical education, and dramatics, and 
before many years we had a language laboratory, a new drama 
building with fine facilities, and new buildings and equipment for 
both natural science and physical education. 

I held out a goal of 75,000 volumes in the library (instead of the 
54,000 volumes we had at that time), and we reached that figure in 
about six years. I wanted more doctorates in the faculty, and we 
were able in seven years to raise the percentage in the liberal arts 
faculty from 35 percent to 50 percent. I suggested as a faculty 
incentive the naming of an annual "Teacher of the Year." When 
we formed the Century Club later that year we decided to ask this 
teacher to give a paper at the annual Century Club dinner and to 
present to him or her at that time a cash award. This plan has been 
followed ever since. 

As a goal for our permanent endowment fund, I suggested the 
sum of $10,000 per student, a figure which was being cited by the 
"experts" at that time as the desirable amount. This proved to be 
much too ambitious, and was not reached in my time. We con- 
tinued to work on endowment, however, as my predecessors had 
done, and succeeded in adding some $6,000,000 (market value) to 
the fund in the 10-year period, which brought it up to about $4,000 
per student. 

As for the new buildings which I envisioned that day in 1958 (a 

10 



theatre, two dormitories, an addition to the student center, a field 
house, a science hall, a chapel, an art building, a new library, and 
additional music facilities), seven were built during my tenure and 
three since then, the chapel being the latest one of the three. In 
addition, as the program developed, we saw other needs: a second 
addition to Memorial Student Center was built; also a book store; a 
thorough renovation of the old Science Hall was made for the 
School of Nursing; and a new astronomical observatory was 
started. 

As I think back on that first year at Illinois Wesleyan, here are 
some of the impressions that still linger with me: 

1. One of the most persistent memories is the drone of power 
saws cutting down some 102 stately campus elm trees that had fal- 
len victim to the Dutch elm disease and phloem necrosis. And after 
the trees had been cut in pieces and removed, there was the added 
buzz of the machine that dug into each stump, reducing it to a pile 
of shavings. 

2. The first Methodist Youth Day was inaugurated that fall under 
the initiative and management of Lee Short. Each fall since 1958, at 
one of the Saturday home football games, church youth and their 
pastors have continued to descend on the campus in great numbers 
(about 2,500 on that first occasion) in order to see our facilities, 
learn something of the program, meet the administrators, enjoy a 
picnic lunch, and see a football game as guests of the University. It 
has been a very effective recruiting idea. 

3. Another enjoyable memory is that of the monthly dinner 
meetings of the All-University Council, a group of about 20 student 
leaders plus an equal number of faculty advisers of student 
organizations and a few administrators. After dinner there were 
brief reports on up-coming events, together with questions and 
answers regarding University policy and any other question that 
came to mind. 

It was at the October 1958 meeting of this council, I believe, 
when I announced that as of the following fall the entire student 
activity fee would be given over to the control of the Student 
Senate. We indicated the general kinds of activities the fund 
would be expected to finance (e.g., the Argus, the Wesleyana, 
chapel speakers, dance bands, etc.) and stated that the University 
would be responsible for collecting and banking the money, but 
that the Student Senate treasurer would be free to draw upon it on 
order of the Student Senate. Each year, just before the deadline 
for catalog copy came around, we would expect the senate to tell 
us the amount of activity fee they wished to charge for the follow- 
ing year, and any reasonable amount would be approved and 
published in the catalog. 

4. On the last Sunday evening before Christmas vacation we 
held the All-University Christmas Carol Sing. This had been 
inaugurated the year before by Sigma Alpha Iota and Acacia. A 
committee was formed to work out a program of carols, one from 

11 




Inaugural recessional, February 7 7, 1959. President Bertholf with Trustee Louis Williams 
(left) and Dr. Harold Case (right), president of Boston University. 

each Greek house and residence hall and one from the faculty. At 
about 6:45 p.m. columns of students from various directions began 
converging on the president's house, where Martha and I had 
invited faculty to come, and for 15 minutes or so we were 
serenaded by a large crowd of students on the lawn. Then we all 
moved over to the Main Lounge of the Memorial Student Center, 
where we of the faculty gathered in one group and the students 
from each house formed a group of their own, and we each sang 
our assigned carol in turn. There was delightful comradeship and 
a bit of rivalry in all of this that was most enjoyable. The evening 
was then topped off with doughnuts and cider. 

5. Of course I remember vividly the inauguration ceremony, 
which was held on February 11, 1959. Bishop Donald Tippett came 
from Berkeley, California, to be our main speaker; Louis L. Wil- 
liams, attorney and secretary of the Board of Trustees, was master- 
of-ceremonies. Official delegates came from some 125 colleges, 
universities, and learned societies. Dr. Harold Case, president of 
Boston University, gave the address at the inaugural luncheon. 
Our son from Roanoke, Virginia, and our daughter from Nashville, 
Tennessee, and my mother from Spivey, Kansas, were all present 
that day to share in the festivities. (My father had died just two 
years previously.) 

6. The ground-breaking for the new administration building was 
a memorable part of the inauguration day program. It was later 
named Holmes Hall in honor of my predecessor, Dr. Merrill J. 
Holmes. 

7. I remember vividly also the planting of the International Tree 
of Learning, which was another feature of the inaugural exercises. 

12 




Flags surround newly planted International Tree of Learning. 



This was a project suggested by one of our trustees, Rev. Loyal 
Thompson, who was a great nature-lover. Dr. George Oborn took 
over the job of obtaining small mailable samples of soil from the 
campuses of 198 universities, 175 in this country and 23 abroad, 
including one each from Korea and Australia. These samples were 
all mixed together, sterilized by heat, and on that day were added 
to the soil that was thrown around the roots of the 10-foot Douglas 
fir as it was planted at a spot immediately west of where ground 
was to be broken later that day for the new administration 
building. 

Dr. Pedro J. Labarthe, Professor of Spanish and a native of 
Puerto Rico, composed the following poem entitled Tree of Learn- 
ing, which was published in the Argus the following week: 

In this land of ours, 
In this blessed land, 
In this proud land of the good Abraham 
Shall grow the Tree of Learning 
Planted in this century and a half of his birth, 
And the roots of this Fir 
Will sip 

Knowledge from the soils 
From all over the world. 
Sapiens! 
And the different languages 
Brought in each handful of earth 



13 



Will have a common language among men- 
Love of Learning. 
And Confucius will speak 
And Pachacamac 

And Netzahualcoyotl will recite his poems 
And also Lao Tze and Gautama Buddha. 
And from Taka-no-Hare 
As from Parnassus 
The trumpets will winnow 
Hosannas in the languages 
Of Aristotle and Plato 
And Virgil and Horatio 
And Santiago and Loyola 
And Wesley and Luther 
And Pope Pius XII. 
Crystal trumpets of knowledge. 

Sapiens! 
And the clear crystal notes 

Will crumble down the Jericos and Babels of ignorance. 
A nimbus of light 
Above the Fir 
The everlasting green Fir 
Will shine tenderly . . . 
The hopeful and guiding light 
In man's soul . . . 
Thus bringing closer and closer 
The children from all the sunsets and all the dawns 
Around the Fir: 
Scepter, green scepter 
In the kingdom of brotherhood. 
Hosanna and hallelujah 
To this work of God, 
To this heart 

Nurtured with earth from all the lands. 
Good Earth, 
Good Mother Earth 
From the Mansions of Knowledge. 
And the green Fir 
Will grow and grow 
With the generations to come. 
And it shall be 
The alert vigilant 
Of our youth — 
Citizens of the winds: 
North, East, South, West, 
Its lemma: 

Brethrens of all creeds and races 

Let us love each other 

Under the light of Learning.* 



14 




Wesleyan leaders in 1959: President Bertholf, Chancellor (and former President) Merrill 
J. Holmes and Trustee Ned Dolan. 

8. Another thing that stands out in my mind regarding that first 
year is the excellent cooperation I received from former President 
Merrill J. Holmes. Dr. Holmes had asked for, and had been given, 
the title of chancellor upon his retirement. As chancellor he was 
allocated a small stipend and was asked to continue to make public 
relations and development contacts. After he and Mrs. Holmes 
had taken an extended vacation trip by station wagon, they 
returned to the home here in Normal which they had purchased 
just before retiring. Dr. Holmes made several trips for the Univer- 
sity during the following two years, and was used as a consultant a 
number of times by the Methodist Board of Education in Nash- 
ville. In 1962, however, he became a victim of cancer, and on May 
22, after several months of painful illness, he passed away. 

* As a footnote on the later history of this tree, I need to report that it grew as if 
inspired by the bits of soil it had attracted from so many different places. Within 
the next three years or so it was large enough to become the official campus 
Christmas tree, and a tradition soon developed that it was to be lighted as a part of 
the All-Campus Christmas Sing each December. 

When it came time to locate the new library building in the spring of 1966, the 
tree was found to be in the way. So, in spite of the fact that by this time it had 
grown to be over 25 feet tall, it was successfully moved some 20 feet nearer to 
Holmes Hall, where it continued to thrive. One morning in the fall of 1967 as I 
came into my office and went to the window as usual to take a look at the library 
under construction, I was horrified to see the International Tree of Learning lying 
ignominiously on its side. It had been hacked down during the night by someone 
whose identity remains a mystery — to me, at least. It is likely that someone 
reading this account will know who did it, but there's no point in telling me now, 
for it would be difficult, even now I must admit, for me to forgive the culprit or 
culprits. And the fewer unforgiven culprits I have on my list as I approach the 
Pearly Gates, the better. 

15 



9. Not only did I receive fine cooperation from Dr. Holmes, but 
this was true also of the Board of Trustees. I made it a point within 
the first several weeks to visit every trustee insofar as possible at 
his or her place of business, and this proved to be of great advan- 
tage to me in getting quickly acquainted. Most of the friendships 
developed as we worked together have continued to the present 
day. 

I was especially appreciative of Ned E. Dolan, president of the 
Board, and Louis L. Williams, secretary. Both of these men were 
graduates of the old Wesleyan School of Law. Williams was a prac- 
ticing lawyer and Dolan was head of a printing and stationery 
business, but each had a keen legal mind and was thoroughly 
devoted to Wesleyan's progress. Each of them gave uncounted 
hours of service to the Board and its executive committee, with 
never a thought of legal fees or other compensation. 

By way of summary, it is interesting, I think, to note the various 
"firsts" that occurred that year of 1958-59. I cite these not to direct 
credit to myself, for the foundation work of most of them had 
already been laid by others before I arrived. But it was thrilling to 
be a part of an ongoing and creative program from the very start of 
my administration. The following are not all of equal importance, 
of course, but they do indicate something of the ferment of ideas 
and action: 

1. Because of a National Science Foundation grant received dur- 
ing the previous year, the first graduate Summer Science Institute 
was held in the summer of 1958. 

2. In October, as mentioned above, we held the first Methodist 
Youth Day. 

3. In October, also, we started the series of All-University Coun- 
cil dinners. 

4. In January we received a grant of $50,000 from the Kresge 
Foundation toward our building fund for the administration 
building; also a gift of $30,000 from Mr. V. C. Swigart to start the 
Amanda E. Swigart organ fund. 

5. In April was held our first "retailer-for-a-day" dinner, bring- 
ing together business executives from the community, business 
administration students from the University, and faculty 
members, after the students had spent a brief internship in the 
stores, offices, and factories of the community. 

6. In April also we held the first of a long series of Faculty- 
Church Relations dinners. Forty clergymen from the community 
accepted our invitation and we paired them with 40 faculty 
members, for a delightful evening. 

7. It was during the month of May that year that the Century 
Club was started, although we did not get the by-laws composed 
until the next fall. 

8. Late in the year the Board approved the equipping of a 
language laboratory. 

9. During that year we closed out the two-year program in 

16 



vocational business training. 

10. Ground was broken on February 11, as previously noted, for 
the new administration building. 

11. The president's house was improved by the adding of a new 
bedroom and a second bath, and the building of a new garage. 

As we closed that first year, I wrote the following for the 1959 
Wesleyana: 

From where I sit — 

As a new president takes the chair occupied by Dr. Merrill 
J. Holmes with so much distinction for the past eleven years, 
what is the view he gets? What is the outlook? 

I am glad to say, in the first place, that the outlook is friend- 
ly. The name "Illinois Wesleyan" has come to be an honored 
and respected name, and people everywhere are speaking of 
it in highest terms. 

But, more importantly, the outlook is optimistic. There are 
problems ahead, to be sure — the danger of continued infla- 
tion, the need for new and improved facilities, the finding 
and keeping of superior teachers, the pressure of secularism 
and materialism and mediocrity — but these have always 
been with us. And the glory and character of Wesleyan is the 
success she has won in this struggle. 

From where I sit, therefore, I see opportunity and chal- 
lenge and hope. It is thrilling to be a part of this venerable but 
vital institution, and to join hands with you in her forward 
march. 



17 




FINANCIAL CHANGES 

Coming as I did from a background of "deaning," my interests 
were at first slanted very much in the direction of the educational 
activities of the University. But I soon found that my attention now 
had to be devoted to finances more than to curriculum or pedagogy 
or keeping up with scientific research. 

One of the planks in my "platform" — one which I had laid down 
from the very start, even during my visits to the campus before 
being appointed — was that the University must each year have a 
balanced budget. Little did I realize, however, how difficult of 
accomplishment that would be. Increases in expenditure seem to 
be inevitable, even in excess of those caused by inflation, because 
to "improve" a program (which is what we all strive constantly to 
do) nearly always means to "spend more money on it." 

Of all the many improvements that might have been made, it 
seemed to me that an increase in faculty salaries would have the 
most wide-ranging good effect. But even a modest percentage 
boost in so large an item costs a great deal of money. To offset this 
we had to plan for increases in tuition charges, plus all we could 
generate in endowment income, alumni fund, church support, 
Associated Colleges of Illinois support,* and other miscellaneous 
income. 

One important "miscellaneous" source of income was that of 
our "Special Investment Fund." It was back about 1948, I believe, 
that the trustees had set aside a few thousand dollars to establish 
this fund. They proposed to call upon this pool whenever an 
opportunity came along to purchase a "special" type of business. 
The particular type they were looking for was a closely-held (i.e., 
family owned) company in which the owner, usually over a long 
period of time, had built up a highly profitable operation — so 
profitable that the combination of corporation taxes and the high 
personal income taxes were taking the major part of the owner's 
profits. 

Such an owner, coming near the time of retirement, often found 
that rather than making a cash sale of his business to another 
person and paying the 25 percent capital gains tax (which would 
be high because the original cost was probably very low), he could 

* The Associated Colleges of Illinois was a group of about 27 private colleges and 
universities in the state which had organized themselves into a corporation, and 
had set up an office, with an executive director, in Chicago. Each year, the presi- 
dent and the director of development of each institution were obligated to spend a 
certain number of days, each teamed up with another president or director of 
development, in calling upon business and industry leaders for contributions. The 
money thus collected, after headquarters expenses, was divided among the 
institutions according to a pre-arranged formula. 

18 



do better by selling it to a not-for-profit organization such as 
Illinois Wesleyan for a small down-payment and taking a note at 
good interest for the remainder. 

The advantage to Wesleyan, of course, was that after a few years 
of allowing the profits from the business to pay off the note, the 
full ownership would now reside in the University, and the 
business could be sold at good profit. Meanwhile, it could continue 
to be operated (often by hiring the former owner to do so) for 
Wesleyan's benefit. Naturally, the University paid all the neces- 
sary corporation taxes, as the former owner had done, but at that 
time nonprofit institutions enjoyed some other tax exemptions 
which made such business ventures, when astutely purchased and 
skillfully operated, highly favorable. 

When I came to the presidency, some nine or ten years after the 
start of this fund, the project was approaching its maximum 
productivity, and we were able to derive from it a sum equal to 
what would have been the income from several millions of 
additional endowment. Not only did this operation furnish an 
increment to our operating funds to keep us in the black for 
several crucial years, but it was of significant help in giving us the 
capital needed to purchase certain equipment, such as for the first 
language laboratory. And what was even more important, it 
enabled us to come up with the matching funds required for the 
Federal loans we obtained to build many of our new campus 
buildings. 

After a few years a change in the tax laws made it unprofitable 
for the University to continue these businesses, and our holdings 
were gradually liquidated. A rough estimate indicates that during 
the time in which the Special Investment Fund was in operation, it 
furnished to the University a total of more than $5,000,000 in cash 
income. 

As a long-time faculty member myself, I was acutely aware of 
the value of a high quality teaching staff in a college of this kind. 
My criteria for "high quality" teachers included a good balance 
between love of the subject-matter of one's specialty and love for 
students and their learning. I often told the faculty that I was more 
anxious for IWU to be known as a place of "great learning" than 
merely as a place of "great teaching." Learning takes place best, 
we all know, when students are somehow induced to put out 
genuine learning effort of their own. The teacher functions best, 
therefore, when he or she shows enthusiasm for the subject and 
indicates its practical application, when he or she makes definite 
assignments and suggests the best available resources for carrying 
out the assignments, and then holds students accountable for high 
levels of performance. 

In the 1950s and 1960s, with constantly expanding enrollments 
all over the country and the formation of many new colleges, par- 
ticularly junior colleges, there were not enough good teachers to 
fill the demand. Hence, the special importance of raising our 

19 



salary scale high enough to keep the good teachers we already had 
and to be able to compete with the best colleges in the market for 
new teachers. Naturally, we were not able to do this all at once. 
But in the 10-year period we succeeded in raising the salary of the 
regular full time teaching staff (professors, associate professors, 
assistant professors, and instructors) from an average of $4,699 in 
1957-58 to an average of $10,741 in 1967-68, an increase of 129 per- 
cent. This raised us from a "C" and "D" rating in the AAUP scale 
to an "A" rating in all except the full professor rank. 

The full time equivalent enrollment increase at Wesleyan dur- 
ing the 1957-67 decade was from 1,194 to 1,610, that is, by 416 stu- 
dents, or 35 percent. This, together with inflation and rising costs 
everywhere, caused an increase in our total educational and 
general budget of 213 percent (from $925,050 in 1957-58 to 
$2,891,102 in 1967-68). Nevertheless, at no time did we have an 
operating deficit; always we were able to cover our expenses by 
increases in tuition, increases in the amount of annual gifts from 
alumni and friends, increases in endowment income, and subsidy 
from the Special Investment Fund.* 

Another financial statistic which is rather significant is the 
increase in the value of the physical plant during this period. A 
description of the new units added will be given later, but suffice 
it at this point to say that based on actual cost of construction (but 
without considering depreciation) the total value of the physical 
plant rose from $4,445,081 to $14,158,965 in the 10-year period, an 
increase of 219 percent. Of course, the indebtedness rose also, 
from $988,935 to $4,990,896 (mostly in low-interest government 
obligations). Subtracting the debt from the total value, we get a net 
increase during the decade of 165 percent. 

Tuition charges constituted a signficant proportion of our 
income during those years, as is always true in private colleges 
and universities. The basic charge in our College of Liberal Arts, 
including the student activity fee (required of everyone) rose from 
$490 per year in 1957-58 to $1,627 in 1967-68, which is a 232 percent 
increase (cf. a 212.5 percent rise in educational and general ex- 
penditures). Offsetting the actual student charges, however, was a 
very substantial addition to the student aid funds, both for loans 
and for grants. 

A couple of years before I arrived, one of the loyal alumni, Mr. 
Roy Church, of Memphis, Tennessee, had created a loan fund of 
$50,000 to be known as the Edgar M. Smith Loan Fund, in honor of 
his father-in-law, who was president of the University from 1898 to 

*The endowment fund grew from $2,403,636 in 1957-58 to $5,061,126 in 1967-68 = 
110.5 percent. As for our use of the surplus from the Special Investment Fund, 
during the first two or three years of the decade, we took as much as $100,000 a 
year from this source to apply to the educational and general budget, but we con- 
cluded that this was contrary to the real purpose of the S.I.F., which was designed 
to fund special, non-recurring needs of the University, and so the use of this sup- 
port for current expenses was tapered off to zero well before the decade ended. 

20 



1905. This generous gift, added to loan funds already on hand, gave 
us a total of about $75,000 to use for this purpose. By 1967-68 this 
had increased to well over $1,000,000, largely because of the 
National Defense Loan Fund of the Federal government. These 
funds were loaned to students, usually without interest so long as 
the students were attending a college or university, after which 
they were to be repaid in easy monthly payments at reasonable 
interest. 

Soon after I came we announced a policy that no qualified stu- 
dent would be denied admission to Wesleyan because of inability 
to pay the tuition charges. In order to administer this policy, we 
asked each student who wished to apply for financial assistance to 
fill out, with the help of the parents, a confidential financial state- 
ment. On the basis of this information, the student was then 
offered a package of aid in one or more of three categories: a 
monetary grant, a loan, and/or a work-job on the campus. A large 
segment of the grant money was, in the later years of my 
administration, supplied by the State of Illinois in its State 
Scholarship program, and by the Educational Opportunity Grants 
of the Federal government. In the endowment funds of the 
University there were also numerous gifts and bequests that had 
been earmarked for scholarship aid, and through the interest 
derived from their investment the total of these grants to students 
rose from about $73,000 in 1958 to over $725,000 in 1968, nearly a 10- 
fold increase. 

By means of these various programs we were able to keep stu- 
dents coming to Wesleyan who would otherwise have had to drop 
out. The proportion of students receiving financial aid steadily 
increased during those years from 43 percent in 1958 to 61 percent 
in 1968. 

The administration of the financial aid program became an 
increasingly important part of the entire University program, for it 
was closely linked to our success in attracting and holding stu- 
dents. But we were also aware of the fact that it could ruin us 
financially if not held to a carefully balanced budget, and it could 
easily ruin our public relations with students and their parents if 
not administered fairly. Much of the success we had in steering 
between these dangerous shoals can be attributed, in the first half 
of my administration, to Miss Anne Meierhofer, dean of students, 
and her staff, and in the last half of the decade to Mr. Lynn 
Nichelson, who took over the directorship of financial aid in 1962, 
and did a superb job. 

Century Club. Although I am frequently given credit for starting 
the Century Club, the credit actually should go mainly to George 
Oborn. He and I worked together in the spring of 1959 and the fol- 
lowing fall to get the club organized and to build up a founding 
membership based on minimum dues of $100. It was my idea, 
however, to have the club sponsor an annual dinner each spring at 
which time a member of the faculty would be honored. This 

21 



teacher would be the featured speaker at the dinner, giving a 
paper which would demonstrate his or her ability to make plain to 
a general audience some subject in the teacher's own field of 
study. An award of $250 was also to be presented. The club by-laws 
were drawn up and adopted on October 15, 1959. 

The faculty formulated rules for selecting the honoree, and for 
the first dinner, in May of 1960, selected Professor William T. 
Beadles. By that time we had 67 charter members. 

The idea grew. Without any major effort on our part the 
membership increased to 88 in 1963, to 111 in 1965, and to 171 in 
1968. The honorees for the remaining eight years of my administra- 
tion were: Wayne Wantland, Dwight Drexler, Elizabeth Oggel, 
Rupert Kilgore, Dorothea Franzen, Joseph Meyers, Marie 
Robinson, and Bunyan Andrew. I think everyone who had ever sat 
in class under these persons recognized them as "great teachers." 

By 1967 we felt secure enough in the idea of a "giving club" to 
organize a President's Club, with a fee of at least $1,000. During the 
first year of this organization we secured 41 charter members, 
which grew to 44 in 1968. 

Dads' Association. I think it was Lee Short who first proposed 
the idea of designating one of the football games as a Dads' Day 
game, to be preceded by a stag luncheon for dads of current stu- 
dents. The first of these was held on November 8, 1958. The Dads' 
Association was not organized, however, until two years later, 
with Charles Merritt as its first president. 

Inasmuch as we had already announced (on October 31, 1958) 
that beginning in the fall of 1959 the tuition fee would be waived 
for any student whose bread-winning parent had died after the 
student had enrolled at IWU, we challenged the new Dads' 
Association to pick up this responsibility. The men did so with 
great enthusiasm, and at the November 11, 1960, luncheon raised 
some $1,700, as I recall, on the spot simply by passing the hat. 



22 



Al DEVELOPMENT OF THE 
H_T PHYSICAL PLANT 

The campus and its improvements in 1958 consisted essentially 
of the following: There were roughly 24 acres of land in the central 
campus, bounded by Main Street, on the west, Emerson on the 
north, Park on the east, and Graham on the south. In addition, 
there was the 4.6-acre athletic field (Wilder Field) located one 
block northeast of the main campus. 

Not all the property in the main campus was owned by the 
University at that time, but the Board of Trustees had already 
embarked on a definite policy of purchasing the 8 to 10 remaining 
properties as soon as they might come on the market. 

The academic buildings consisted of 13 structures: Hedding 
("Duration") Hall, Shaw Hall, Presser Hall, Buck Memorial 
Library, Science Hall, Old North Hall, the Behr Observatory, a 
faculty office building, a dramatics scene shop, the workshop 
theatre ("Spotlight Alley"), the art building, the art gallery 
building, and Memorial Gymnasium. 

The residential and activity buildings consisted of: Blackstock 
Hall, Southwest Hall (now called Gulick Hall), Pfeiffer Hall, Kemp 
Hall, (old) Munsell Hall, Magill Hall, Franklin Hall (now called 
Dolan Hall), and the Memorial Student Center. There were also 
six sorority and six fraternity houses, a power plant, a stadium, 
and the president's house. 

The first building project of the new administration after my 
wife and I arrived was the making of an addition to the president's 
house and the building of a garage for our personal car. The addi- 
tion consisted of a downstairs bedroom and a bathroom. Work had 
already started on the garage, as I recall, by the time we got here, 
and that on the house followed soon afterward. It was completed 
in the spring of 1959, at a cost of about $12,000 for both structures. 

Administration Building. The second building project — one that 
was already in the final stages of planning when we arrived — was 
that of an administration building. Dr. Holmes had kindly sent me 
the blue-prints for the presidential office suite and had allowed 
me to make suggestions before I came.* Ground was broken for 
this building on my inauguration day, February 11, 1959, and the 
structure was completed during the Christmas holidays of 1959. 
Cost: $443,044. We moved over from old "Duration Hall" about 



I remember that one suggestion I made was to have a blackboard on one wall of 
the president's office, concealed by a pair of sliding doors. Although this must 
have given the architect (and the contractor) considerable extra work, I am happy 
to say that it was done, and done beautifully, and it served admirably for my 
Cabinet meetings nearly every time we came together for a planning session of 
any kind. 

23 




\ , '.'■■;■] ■■■>■:■■ 



■ J, 



Holmes Hall the administration building, under construction in 1 960. 

New Year's Day, 1960. I recall the day on which my new desk and 
executive chair arrived. They had just been put into place, but had 
not yet been used, and as I stood there admiring the elegance and 
beauty of the new office, with its deep plush carpet, its rich 
draperies, and shiny new furniture, who should step through the 
door but (President Emeritus) Dr. Holmes. It was a propitious 
moment for him to arrive — he who had spent so much time raising 
money for the building and working with the architect on the 
plans, and who was destined never to be able to use it. So, on the 
spur of the moment I developed in my mind a little "dedication 
ceremony" for the office. Seating Dr. Holmes in the chair, I asked 
him to swivel about so as to take in the entire room, and then to let 
his spiritual "mantle," as it were, fall on me, so that I might follow 
worthily in his footsteps. This he did, very graciously and with 
appropriate words. 

A few weeks later the trustees, at my suggestion, voted to name 
the building "Holmes Hall" in honor of Dr. Holmes. At 
Commencement time that year (1960) we held the formal dedica- 
tion. Dr. Holmes was at the time conducting a survey at Claflin 
College, Orangeburg, S. C, and could not be present in person, but 
we arranged a long-distance telephone hook-up with amplifica- 
tion, so that he was able to speak to the assembled crowd in 
person, though not physically present. 

Theatre. Meanwhile, at the December 1959 meeting of the 
executive committee of the Board of Trustees, I presented my con- 
cern regarding the poor quarters for the School of Drama. 
"Spotlight Alley" was simply an old carriage house improvised as 
a theatre. Not only was it a fire hazard when crowded with its lit- 
tle audience, but it offered very meager stage facilities, to say 
nothing of dressing and storage rooms and other facilities for a 
complete School of Drama. After some discussion, the committee 
voted to recommend to the Board that the next new building to be 



24 




Laying the cornerstone for McPherson Hall: (left to right) Dr. Bertholf Fletcher Coleman, 
Everette Walker, Melba Kirkpatrick. 

erected should be a theatre building, and that the second priority 
should be a new science building. 

George Oborn and I were not long in getting to work on the 
financing of these two structures. For the theatre, we approached 
Mrs. Henry McPherson, widow of the 10th president of the Univer- 
sity. It was eventually arranged that she would deed to the Univer- 
sity the farm owned by her and Dr. McPherson, and that the 
building would bear the name McPherson Theatre. Specifications 
were put out for bids in January of 1962, the contract was signed 
May 2, 1962, cornerstone laid October 27, and the building was 
completed early in 1963. Cost: $498,582. 

The Illinois Agricultural Association Project. As stated above, 
the executive committee in December 1959 had placed a science 
building in high priority, but none of us at that time had any idea 
where the money would come from. We had no way of knowing 
that at that very moment officials of the Illinois Agricultural 
Association in Chicago, having decided to move their head- 
quarters to the Bloomington-Normal area, were wondering where 
they could find temporary quarters for their offices while the new 
headquarters building was being erected. 

On January 4, 1960 the IAA sent a delegation consisting, as I 
recall, of their president, their treasurer, an attorney, an architect, 
and a contractor, to ascertain how much temporary office space 
they could rent in Bloomington-Normal. They needed, they said, 
some 50,000 square feet. They found after considerable inquiry 
that although they might indeed find that much space available in 
the community, it would be so scattered and fragmented that it 
could not be used economically. 



25 




Constructed by Illinois Agricultural Association, this building later became Illitiois Wes- 
ley ans Fred Young Field House. 

So, at someone's suggestion, they approached Mr. Ned Dolan, 
president of our Board of Trustees. They indicated to him that they 
might even be willing to finance the construction of a temporary 
building on Illinois Wesleyan land, provided they could use 
the building for two years or so, after which time their own new 
building would presumably be completed, and they would then 
vacate the temporary structure and give it to Wesleyan for 
whatever use we might have for it. 

After listening to this suggestion from IAA, Ned Dolan called me 
on the telephone and asked what I thought of the idea. I told him I 
liked it very much — that it seemed like an answer to prayer — but I 
made two reservations: one was that we not allow another tem- 
porary building to be built on the campus (we were even then try- 
ing to get rid of the remaining army-surplus barracks we had), and 
the other was that we try to get two smaller buildings built instead 
of one 50,000 square foot monster. Would IAA consider, I asked 
him, the building of one structure which we could later transform 
into a science building, and a second which we could make into a 
field house? And, if we should pay the utilities, for example, 
would they consider erecting permanent buildings? 

Well, to make a not-so-long story even shorter, that is exactly 
what was done. IAA agreed to build one concrete-and-block three- 
story building of 33,600 square feet to become our science building, 
and a 26,600 square foot quonset-type building entirely free of sup- 
porting columns on the inside, one suitable for a field house. We 
agreed that both structures would consist only of outside walls, 
floors, windows, stairs, toilets, overhead shop-type lighting fix- 
tures, etc. without interior finishing except paint, without parti- 



26 



tions, floor tiling, plastering, air conditioning, or other features we 
might eventually wish to add. 

On January 12, 1960, we called a special Board meeting, at which 
the IAA representatives were present, and there we worked out 
most of the details. Then, on January 20 the executive committee of 
the Board met and signed the agreement. Meanwhile, our architect 
had been hastily called into consultation with their architect, and 
plans had been drawn up for the first of these two buildings, the 
three-story structure that would eventually serve as our science 
building. Within a day or two bulldozers appeared, and the land at 
the head of Franklin Avenue was cleared of the remains of the old 
power house, and construction began. 

It was probably the fastest architectural planning ever done on a 
university building. Naturally, haste made waste to some extent, 
and we later found, when the detailed blue-prints were completed 
for the conversion of this building to its scientific functions, that 
many time-consuming and expensive things had to be done that 
could have been avoided if we had known just where to install 
electrical conduits, openings for plumbing, etc., when the concrete 
was first poured. 

The Field House. The construction of the second building, 
destined to become our field house, was not quite so rushed, but 
started within a few months, and was actually completed sooner 
than the other. 

Our contract with IAA provided that during the several months 
required to construct these two buildings to the point where they 
could be used by the IAA, Illinois Wesleyan would furnish the 
Association rent free some 22,000 sq. ft. of floor space in existing 
buildings, so that IAA could move at least a part of its operations to 
Bloomington at once. Fortunately, old "Duration Hall," which we 
had just vacated, was available and we found the remaining space 
in the basement of Magill Hall, one of the men's residence halls. 

IAA proved to be a fine organization with which to deal. They 
lived up fully to the letter of the contract signed. After they moved 
out of the field house we built locker rooms, showers, offices, etc., 
and laid a fine maple floor for a regulation basketball court. The 
building was dedicated March 2, 1962, and named the Fred Young 
Field House in honor of our illustrious alumnus by that name, 
Class of 1915 (law), who had been a sports writer for The Daily 
Pantagraph since 1922. Total cost to the University: $454,750. 

The Science Building. The completing of the science building 
after it was vacated by IAA was, of course, a much more com- 
plicated job, and was not finished until February of 1964. 

The way in which this building acquired the name of Earl 
Edward Sherff is an interesting story. 

It seems that the first contact Dr. Sherff had with Illinois 
Wesleyan took place in 1931 during the presidency of Dr. William 
J. Davidson. At any rate, we have in the file a copy of the letter 
which Dr. Davidson wrote to Dr. Sherff on December 21, 1931, in 

27 




Also built under agreement with 7AA, this structure was completed in February 1 964 and 
named SherffHall of Science. 

answer, obviously, to one that Dr. Sherff had sent to him. In his let- 
ter, Dr. Sherff had apparently asked three questions on behalf of a 
"relative" who was thinking of naming an educational institution 
as a beneficiary in a will. One of the questions asked was about the 
role of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the governance and for- 
mulation of educational policy for the University. The other two 
had to do with the policy of the University regarding dancing and 
smoking on the campus. 

Dr. Davidson answered these questions in a way that was 
apparently satisfactory to Dr. Sherff, and as a result it seems that 
at that time he and Mrs. Sherff named Illinois Wesleyan as a 
legatee of the residue of their estate, although neither had ever 
attended here or even visited the campus. Dr. Sherff himself was a 
graduate of Albion College, Michigan, and had a master's and a 
doctor's degree from the University of Chicago in botany. He had 
taught for nearly 30 years at the Chicago Teachers College and had 
been since 1936 a research associate of the Field Museum in 
Chicago. Out of a modest salary he had bought up a fairly large 
number of shares of "blue-chip" stocks and these had increased in 
value until at his retirement in 1951 he had a considerable estate. 
Apparently the "relative" he had in mind when he wrote to Dr. 
Davidson was himself and his wife. 

My first contact with Dr. Sherff was by way of a brief letter he 
wrote on November 13, 1962, addressed simply to "President, 
Illinois Wesleyan University." Its first sentence read as follows: 
"As my wife and I have reached a point in our lives where we wish 



28 



to revise our wills drawn up more than three decades ago, we 
deem it but prudent to secure first-hand from our formerly 
designated legatees certain information relating to their guiding 
policies". He then proceeded to ask several questions: What was 
our policy in regard to "integration" in student organizations and 
in regard to accepting gifts designated for a particular race of stu- 
dents. He indicated also that his and Mrs. Sherff's particular 
interests were science and music, respectively, and asked for a 
current catalog and other publications. 

I replied as frankly and honestly as I could, and there followed 
over the next two months two further exchanges of letters in which 
he told about their invalid son, Miner, and their determination to 
provide first of all in their wills for his life-time support and care. 
He also stated his and Mrs. Sherff's plan to visit the campus 
whenever good weather allowed the trip from Hastings, Michigan, 
where they lived. This visit took place on Thursday, February 8, 
1963. They came unannounced, and it was providential that both 
George Oborn and I were on campus and available that day to give 
them some time and attention, and to take them to lunch. George 
was particularly helpful in all our dealings with the Sherffs. He 
sensed at once their need for help in estate planning, and was able 
to work out a plan eventually whereby Miner's interests were 
amply provided for, and whereby the parents would receive a 
good annuity income throughout the life of both. 

During the succeeding years there was a steady growth in our 
good relations with the Sherffs. They visited the campus again in 
1963 at Commencement time, when it was announced that the new 
science building would be named the Earl Edward Sherff Hall of 
Science, and also on February 5, 1964, when the completed 
building was dedicated during Founders Day ceremonies, each 
time being entertained by Martha and me at the president's home. 

There were, as I recall, one or two additional visits before Dr. 
Sherff's death on May 16, 1966. During these three years he 
gathered together all his more than 100 botanical publications, 
carefully indexed them all, and presented them to our library, 
where they are housed as a special collection. During this time 
also, Dr. Oborn worked out with Dr. Sherff a series of contracts 
whereby the disposal of his entire estate was planned in con- 
siderable detail and in a way to minimize the legal and financial 
burden that would otherwise have fallen on Mrs. Sherff after his 
death. 

In the Faculty Bulletin of May 23, 1966, I wrote the following 
tribute to Dr. Sherff: 

EARL EDWARD SHERFF 

1886-1966 

In the short time (since November 11, 1962) in which Dr. 

and Mrs. Sherff have had a personal relationship to Illinois 

Wesleyan, they have proved to be delightful friends, alert to 

29 



and interested in every phase of the University's program. It 
was with particular sorrow, therefore, that we learned of the 
severe stroke that struck Dr. Sherff down on May 12, and of 
his death on May 16. 

Dr. Sherff was a rare combination of the sensitive teacher 
and devoted research worker of the past generation. In fact, 
the roots of his training and his professional ethics went back 
to the "classical" period of the teaching profession. Even his 
diction and his phraseology reflected a classical training, and 
to get a letter from him was like receiving one from James 
Boswell or Samuel Johnson. 

In their several visits here, he and Mrs. Sherff have 
endeared themselves to the many of us who have met them, 
and we shall certainly miss Dr. Sherff's kindly and alert 
interest in each one of us personally. His memory will 
remain with us in the name "Sherff Hall," and in the various 
benefactions which will accrue to us at a later date. 

Meanwhile, we extend to Mrs. Sherff and their invalid son, 
Miner, our sincere sympathy, and our wish for her continued 
health and happiness. L.M.B. 

As it turned out, their son Miner lived only a few months after 
his father passed away, but Mrs. Sherff survived for almost 11 
years, and visited the campus several times during those years. 

The total cost of Sherff Hall probably exceeded $1,000,000, for in 
addition to what the IAA spent on the original shell, the University 
spent $802,446 for its completion. 

What Should be the Size of the University? We had many discus- 
sions during the early nineteen sixties regarding the most 
desirable ultimate size of the University. There are obvious 
advantages in small size, we recognized, but too small a size either 
restricts the range of curricular offerings or, if the range is not held 
down, tends to increase the faculty-student ratio and thus causes 
the cost-per-student to shoot too high. This, in turn, lowers the 
faculty salaries and in the long run reduces the total quality of the 
institution. 

We wanted to preserve the "mini-university" model that was 
gradually emerging, with our professional schools of music, art, 
drama, and nursing. We wanted also to continue to offer students a 
liberal education, with preparation for graduate work in 20 or so 
fields, along with opportunity for specialization in business, 
insurance, education, and in social work. 

It seemed to us that this would require a student body of about 
1500-1600, and we set our sights on building facilities, both 
academic and residential, to accommodate this number for the 
next decade or so, with possibly as many as 2,000 in the more dis- 
tant future. 

Bookstore. One thing we badly needed was a modern university 
bookstore. Prior to 1964 the bookstore had been a small, part-time 

30 



operation, handled by the business office for the supplying of text- 
books at the beginning of each semester. But by that date we had 
abandoned the old "Spotlight Alley" theatre building and had 
replaced it with a new building — one designed for an up-to-date 
commercial operation, selling not only textbooks but all the usual 
merchandise associated with modern bookstores. 

We dedicated this structure in January of 1964. Cost: $36,749. 

Presser Hall Pipe Organ. Back in the early days of my 
administration I had become acquainted with Mr. V. C. Swigart of 
Clinton, Illinois. He was an elderly man, a raiser of registered 
Aberdeen Angus cattle. His wife had been killed as a bride years 
before in a tragic railroad-crossing accident, and he had never 
remarried. She was a musician, we discovered and we suspected 
that he might like to memorialize her with a gift to our School of 
Music. 

Both George Oborn and my wife and I had visited Mr. Swigart at 
his farm and had presented to him the idea of a new organ in 
Presser Hall as such a memorial. He gave no indication that the 
idea appealed to him, but he did accept Martha's invitation to visit 
the campus and to have lunch at our house. On the day agreed 
upon, George drove down to Clinton and brought him to my office, 
arriving shortly before noon. After we had had a brief period of 
small-talk about his cattle, he reached into his hip pocket, pulled 
out a well-worn billfold, and extracted from it a dirty, much- 
folded, blank check. Spreading it out on my desk and smoothing 
out the wrinkles, he brought a stub of a pencil out from his shirt 
pocket and said abruptly: "Could you use a check for $30,000?" 

After getting my breath again I allowed as how we probably 
could. In fact, I told him that this was just the gift we needed for a 
new Schantz organ, and that we would name it the "Swigart 
Memorial Organ" in honor of his wife. 

The new organ was dedicated on November 8, 1961. Mr. Swigart 
was present, and our distinguished alumnus, Dr. Robert Baker, at 
that time director of the School of Music at Union Theological 
Seminary, New York City, gave the dedication recital. 

About two years later, with the aid of a second grant from the 
Presser Foundation at Philadelphia (their original grant had 
financed the construction of Presser Hall in 1929), we were able to 
make a rather complete refurbishing of the auditorium in the 
building, and on May 30, 1964, we rededicated this, naming it 
the Westbrook Auditorium, in honor of Arthur Westbrook, dean of 
the School of Music from 1922 to 1939. 

Duration Hall. Almost everyone, I assume, is familiar with the 
fact that Wesleyan's Old Main building (Hedding Hall) burned in 
January 1943. It was a spectacular fire, according to all accounts, 
and was certainly a terrific loss to the University at the time. In 
order to salvage something from the tragedy, after the debris had 
been cleared away it was decided that some use could be made of 
the basement area; and so a roof was constructed over the entire 

31 



/ 




Demolition of Duration Hall, last remnant of Hedding Hall, in 1965 prepared site for con- 
struction of University library. 




Cornerston plaque and time capsule from 1870 dedication of 
Hedding Hall (background) were disappointment to 1 965 viewers. 



32 



area, the arch over the main door was left intact, and the building 
was dubbed "Duration Hall," to be used mainly for administrative 
offices "for the duration," until a new building could be erected. As 
noted above, my own use of this building for a president's office 
lasted for a year and a half, i.e., until Holmes Administration 
Building was completed in January 1960. By that time, the 
"duration" had lasted for 17 years. 

Actually, however, it lasted for nearly six years longer. After the 
administrative offices moved out in 1960, the building was used for 
about six months by IAA (while waiting for quarters to be made 
available in the "pre"-science building and the "pre"-fieldhouse). 
Then it was occupied by the staff of the Central Illinois 
Conference of the Methodist Church for most of the remaining 
time, until the new Conference office building was completed in 
1964. (See page 41) After that it was virtually unoccupied until it 
was finally razed in 1965. 

I must confess that it was a rather sad day for me when on that 
October morning in 1965 a huge bulldozer moved in and began at 
the north-west corner of the building to push down the remaining 
walls of old Hedding Hall. So much of history resided in these 95- 
year-old-walls — so much of struggle and uncertainty, of faith and 
perseverance— that it pulled at the heartstrings to see the great 
stones treated with such disrespect and violence by a mechanical 
monster. My greatest disappointment came when we reached 
the two-story-high arch that had been preserved as a frame for the 
front door of the building. I had visions of being able to save the 
stones of this arch and of re-erecting it as a sort of symbol of 
"Christian education for the whole of life." But when the masonry 
at the rear of the arch was removed it became evident that the arch 
could not be rebuilt as a free-standing structure without a great 
deal of expense, and we were forced reluctantly to let it be carted 
away as rubble except for the keystone and the bordering stones 
constituting the top of the arch. These we saved for the time being, 
hoping they could eventually be used, but a few years later I found 
that they had been discarded also. 

We were also disappointed in the contents of the cornerstone. 
Elmo Watkins in his The Illinois Wesleyan Story, 1850-1950, had 
reported a detailed inventory of the materials placed in this box on 
September 9, 1870. But by the time we retrieved the box from the 
cornerstone in 1965, it had rusted through in many places, and the 
box and its contents were so damaged by water, mildew, and rust 
as to be almost worthless. 

Old North Hall During the following summer (July 1966), in 
order to make room for the erection of the new library, it became 
necessary also to remove Old North Hall. Historically, this was the 
first, and for nearly 15 years the only building on the Wesleyan 
campus. It had been built in 1856, and by this time was enveloped 
in an aura of sentiment on the part of a great many alumni. We 
were reluctant, therefore, to destroy it, and considered several 

33 



alternative campus plans that might have saved it. But a careful 
architectural appraisal of its condition showed that during its 110 
years it had deteriorated to a point where its restoration to modern 
usefulness would have been more expensive than to tear it down 
and rebuild it. And so, on July 9, 1966, the wreckers began 
pounding its walls, and within hours it was reduced to rubble. A 
few years later, Professor Anthony Vestuto in the School of Art, 
made a wax sculpture of the bell tower of Old North, which was 
then cast in bronze and mounted on the head of the University 
mace, made from walnut wood taken from the interior of Old 
North. Thus, a symbol of the University's first building is 
preserved for posterity, and is displayed at each University func- 
tion where there is a faculty procession. 

Quarters for the School of Nursing. The decision as to whether 
or not to embark on a collegiate program of nursing education was 
a difficult one. Most of the advice we obtained from other private 
colleges of our size was to stay away from such a program because 
of its expense. For more than a year (1958-1959) we argued the 
question, both within the faculty and within the Board of Trustees. 
In the end, however, (as will be mentioned again in the next 
chapter) the decision was made to go ahead, and to house the new 
school in the old science building, a facility that was scheduled to 
be vacated as soon as the new science building was completed. 

The old science building was, like North Hall and Hedding Hall, 
a veteran of the early campus. It had been constructed in 1910 as 
the third academic building of the University. A careful engineer- 
ing study of the building in 1964 showed that it was still in good 
shape structurally, and could be retained. So, it was decided to do 
an extensive job of remodeling, with a view to housing the School 
of Nursing in the upper two floors and the department of psy- 
chology in the basement floor. Dr. Mary Shanks, director of the 
School of Nursing, together with a committee of prominent women 
in the local community, undertook a campaign to raise part of the 
funds for the project. Their success was due partly to the motiva- 
tion furnished by a conditional matching gift of $25,000 provided 
by Mrs. Hazle Buck Ewing. Since this was given in honor of Mrs. 
Ewing's close personal friend, Dr. E. M. Stevenson, the building 
(which had had no name up to that time except "Science Hall") 
was named The E. M. Stevenson Hall. The other main gift for the 
building was a grant of $158,000 by the National Institutes of 
Health under the Medical Facilities Act. By means of these gifts 
we were able to completely remodel and refurbish the interior, 
including the replacing of all the interior partitions and floors, 
installing new stairs, doors, window frames and sashes, new 
plumbing and wiring, and central air-conditioning. It was 
dedicated on October 9, 1965. Cost: $278,000. 

Additions to Memorial Student Center. The rapid increase in 
enrollment in the late fifties had put a strain on our accommoda- 
tions in Memorial Student Center, particularly the snack bar and 

34 



recreational area. Encouraged by the Federal government's policy 
of making available low interest matching loans for income- 
producing university facilities, we applied for and received in 1960 
a loan that enabled us to make a significant addition to this center. 
We excavated underneath the south one-third of the building, 
which had previously not been excavated, and made here a 
recreation room for billiards, table tennis, etc. In addition, we 
added to the building on its east side an attractive snack bar area 
(which the students named the DUGOUT), with a roof-deck level 
with, and opening into, the Main Lounge of the existing building. 
This enabled us to increase substantially the dining area on the 
ground floor. 

The addition was completed in the fall of 1961, and dedicated on 
October 28. Cost: $212,451. 

By 1964 we were again in a period of accelerated growth as we 
tried to bring our student body up to the desired goal of about 
1,650. The main need now was for better food preparation 
facilities and a larger dining area. 

Again we applied for and received a Federal matching grant that 
enabled us to add a large two-story section to the north end of the 
center, giving us a new enlarged kitchen area plus a lounge and 
convenient private dining room (the Davidson Room) on the 
ground floor, and on the second floor some 16,611 square feet of 
new dining area, divided into two large sections for general stu- 
dent use plus two smaller rooms reservable for special groups. 

This second addition was completed in the fall of 1966 and 
dedicated on October 15. Cost: $1,256,895 plus $339,524 for equip- 
ment. 

Residence Halls. As student enrollment increased there was 
great pressure for additional housing. Temporary relief was 
gained by using old residences in or near the campus which were 
being picked up by the University gradually as they came on the 
market. Considerable thought was given to the question of 
whether to build "high rise" residence halls where great 
dependence would have to be placed on elevators, or to continue 
with three-to-four story buildings without elevators. The latter 
would, of course, require more land, and we had come to a place 
where campus land was getting scarce. We did not even own all 
the land within the "campus proper," and we had no power of 
eminent domain to acquire these lots. 

So, it was decided to "go up." With the help of our architects and 
professional campus planners we developed a master campus 
plan that provided space for three high rise residence halls on 
Main Street at the northwest corner of the campus, only two of 
which would probably be needed for our projected 1,500 students. 
Part of this space had been occupied by the old Acacia house, but 
Acacia had by this time purchased the Theta Chi house a block- 
and-a-half further south on Main Street, and Theta Chi had moved 
still further south to another house which they had bought and 

35 



enlarged, on the west side of Main Street opposite Mennonite 
Hospital. 

We were also encouraged to go ahead with more residence hall 
building by the policy of the Federal government at that time in 
providing low interest loans for income-producing college 
facilities. Accordingly, in the spring of 1962 we applied for and 
were granted a loan of $625,000, and the first of the two buildings 
was started that summer (August 8, 1962). 

At their spring meeting in 1963 the trustees voted to name the 
new residence hall (already under construction) Ferguson Hall, in 
honor both of Professor Wilbert Ferguson, distinguished teacher 
and administrator at the University from 1894 to 1944, and his 
daughter, Miss Constance Ferguson, professor of French here from 
1926 to 1952 and director of Memorial Student Center from 1947 to 
1960, a total of 84 years of service by the two of them! The building 
was dedicated on October 19, 1963. 

The other of these two "tall halls" (which had already been 
given the name Munsell Hall — for the Rev. Charles W. C. Munsell,. 
financial agent of the University from 1856 to 1873, and his brother, 
the Rev. Oliver S. Munsell, president from 1857 to 1873) was 
started in October of 1965, at the same time that the second addi- 
tion to Memorial Student Center was started. In fact, the two pro- 
jects were bid together, at a total cost of $2,756,000. They were 
rushed to completion in record-breaking time, and were both 
dedicated at Homecoming on October 15, 1966. 

Our original plan for Munsell Hall called for a covered walkway 
on the east side of the building, running past Ferguson Hall and 
into the student center, so that the girls of both halls could walk to 
meals protected from the weather. But this feature was scratched 
in the final plans in order to hold down the cost. As the buildings 
were nearing completion, however, it was discovered that not all 
of the contingency funds had been used, and that the amount 
remaining would be sufficient to build the walkway after all. So, 
this very desirable feature was approved in September, 1966, as an 
add-on, and was completed a couple of months later. 

Fraternity and Sorority Houses. Social and professional Greek 
letter organizations have had a long and respected place in Illinois 
Wesleyan history. Elmo Watson in his The Illinois Wesleyan Story, 
1850-1950, records that the first fraternity, Phi Gamma Delta, was 
chartered here in 1866, and the first sorority, Kappa Kappa Gam- 
ma, in 1873. The fraternity Tau Kappa Epsilon was actually 
founded at Illinois Wesleyan in 1899, and was the first of the 
"Greeks" to have its own house. By 1958 when I arrived, there 
were twelve of these houses, six for fraternities and six for 
sororities, housing over 300 students. 

Naturally, there was gradual deterioration and obsolescence of 
these residences, making it desirable from time to time to replace 
one or another of them, always with considerable financial stress. 
The trustees, several of whom were fraternity alumni and all of 

36 



whom were aware of the value of these houses in meeting our 
residence needs, were glad to make available whatever help the 
Board could offer, without taking away the financial 
independence of the respective organization. Sometimes this took 
the form of paying a good price for the old property being aban- 
doned; sometimes it was in making a generous interest-free loan to 
the fraternity or sorority for a limited time; sometimes it involved 
the providing of a building lot at little or no cost. In the case of TKE 
it took the form of making them a long-term fair-interest loan from 
our endowment fund, and of subsequently collecting room and 
board payments from the residents of the house to insure a sound 
repayment schedule. 

When I arrived in Bloomington the Kappa Delta sorority was just 
finishing the rebuilding of their house on Main Street after a dis- 
astrous fire the previous fall. Acacia, which had just been 
organized in 1957, was negotiating with Theta Chi to take over their 
house at 915 North Main after Theta Chi made its planned move 
south to 814 North Main to a larger house. 

Meanwhile, the Kappa Kappa Gammas were finding that their 
chapter house at 1401 North Main was becoming too small and too 
obsolete for their needs, and with the help of a strong group of 
alumnae, undertook the task of acquiring land and building a new 
house at 105 East Graham. This building was started in the winter 
of 1964-65. The University purchased their old house, named it 
Adams Hall, and has been housing students in it ever since. The 
handsome new KKG house on Graham Street was dedicated in the 
fall of 1966. 

At about this same time the Tau Kappa Epsilon fraternity, which 
was housed then in one of the old "mansions" on Main Street just 
west of the campus, was finding the upkeep and utility bills 
oppressive, and was casting about for relief. The Board of 
Trustees, by purchasing several properties on Franklin Avenue 
just at the west end of Wilder Athletic Field, was able to offer the 
TKEs a building site, and after they had purchased it, to make 
them a loan, as stated above, to construct the building. Construc- 
tion was started in the fall of 1965 and completed about a year 
later, so that it could be dedicated on October 15, 1966, along with 
Munsell Hall and the second addition to Memorial Student Center 

Library. None of the building projects during my administration 
received as much planning attention as did the new library. 

Our first thought was to build an annex to Buck Memorial 
Library to give us the extra space needed. Before this idea got 
beyond the talking stage, however, a decision was made to employ 
a library consultant to advise us. On the recommendation of the 
Methodist department of higher education in Nashville, the 
executive committee of the Board in July of 1962 employed Profes- 
sor Guy Lyle of Emory University to make this study. He came to 
the campus that fall for several days and gave us a report which 
was read to the Board on October 30, 1962. His conclusion was that 

37 



Buck Memorial Library simply could not be adapted to modern 
library use even with an annex, and he strongly advised us to build 
an entirely new building. The Board took no action at that time, but 
at its May 18, 1963, meeting, after the matter had been considered 
by its buildings and grounds committee, it rejected the Lyle recom- 
mendation and authorized preliminary plans to be drawn up for 
the renovation of and the addition to the Buck building. 

The faculty was not pleased with this decision, and at its meeting 
on November 11, 1963, and also on December 2, 1963, strongly 
recommended that a new library building be constructed. Conse- 
quently, when the executive committee of the Board met on 
December 4, 1963, it took the following action, as recorded in its 
Minutes: 

"After lengthy discussion . . . motion was made by Benjamin 
Weir, seconded by P. A. Washburn and carried, that the 
Administration be authorized to proceed with plans for a new 
library at a cost of approximately $600,000 for the building 
and $100,000 for equipment, the site of the library to be 
selected after further study and named at a later date." 

At its meeting on January 8, 1964, the executive committee 
appointed John Dickinson as chairman of a "Library Fund Cam- 
paign" committee. This became the third phase of the "12th 
Decade Advance" campaign already in progress under the profes- 
sional direction of Ward, Dresham and Rinehardt, Inc. 

In order to get up-to-date ideas for the new library and to make 
sure of its adaptability to our needs for decades to come, our 
librarian, Rodney Ferguson, was sent on a series of visits (totaling 
about 1,500 miles) to other campuses where libraries had just been 
completed. There were, of course, frequent meetings with Orme 
Evans, the architect, as these ideas took shape. 

The location of the new building posed something of a problem. 
Several sites were suggested, the one at the tennis courts, just 
across from the Sigma Chi house being seriously considered for a 
while. Gradually, however, we came to the conclusion (executive 
committee, April 22, 1965) that the library, representing as it does 
the focus of the academic program, ought to be located in the 
center of the campus where it would not only have the prominence 
it deserved but also the maximum accessibility. To do this and at 
the same time attain an open quadrangle, it was necessary to 
remove both old Duration Hall (October 1965) and Old North Hall 
(July 1966), as already described above. 

Ground was broken for the new library in December of 1966; the 
cornerstone was laid on October 14, 1967; and it was finished in the 
early summer of 1968. The moving of the books was carefully 
organized by Rodney Ferguson, and carried out by the staff and a 
hired crew of high school students during that summer. 

The cost of the project turned out to be considerably greater 
than the $700,000 originally envisioned (not a unique 

38 




The University library, named for Jack Sheean, on the redesigned Quad. 

experience!)— actually about $1,173,000 for the building and 
$114,470 for the furnishings and equipment. Financing was 
accomplished in a three-part package: one part was a Federal loan 
of $553,000, secured by a mortgage and by some $300,000 of our own 
money (this was the second part), advanced in anticipation of our 
library fund campaign; and the third part was a Federal grant of 
$429,000 made under the Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963. 

The library went without a name for about 10 years. But after the 
death of Mr. Jack Sheean of Bloomington in 1978, his widow 
graciously made a generous gift to the University, and the library 
was then named "The Sheean Library." 

Observatory. The old Behr Observatory, with its cone-shaped 
roof, had been a landmark of the Wesleyan campus ever since 
1894. It contained what was for that time an amazingly 
sophisticated and valuable piece of equipment, an eighteen-inch 
reflector telescope made by John Calver in England, the eighth 
largest telescope in the United States at that time. It was presented 
to the University by Mr. C. A. Behr of Chicago, and in the capable 
hands of Professor Melvin P. Lackland, Dr. F. S. Mortimer, and 
others, served an important function in science instruction. For the 
last few decades prior to "Sputnik," however, the observatory had 
been largely unused, and had fallen into considerable disrepair. 

By 1965, however, there was a decided resurgence of interest in 
astronomy and astrophysics in the scientific world. In fact, one of 
our physics teachers, Raymond G. Wilson, was even then planning 

39 



to work for his doctorate in the astronomy department of the 
University of Arizona. Consequently, even though the observatory 
building was standing in a place that interfered with the construc- 
tion of the new library, and even though the structure was badly 
deteriorated, we did not want to destroy it and thus render useless 
the valuable instruments it contained. 

It was at this point that Mr. Orme Evans came to our rescue. He 
was a member of the architectural firm that we had used to design 
all the new construction on the campus for many years — even 
before my administration. His father had been a trustee of the 
University during those World War I days when the institution was 
going through some hard times. It was he who spearheaded a local 
campaign that raised nearly $700,000 that resulted, among other 
things, in the building of Memorial Gymnasium. 

When Orme Evans realized the precarious future of our obser- 
vatory, he suggested to his mother that the Evans family contribute 
a sum that would cover about one-third of the cost of a new obser- 
vatory building, with the thought that this would serve as a 
memorial to his father, Mark Evans. 

Mrs. Evans graciously agreed, and we immediately went to work 
to raise the remainder of the estimated $90,000 required. An 
application to the Federal government resulted in a grant of 
$28,457; the Kresge Foundation gave us $10,000; and the remainder 
was taken from unrestricted University funds. The project was 
completed after I left office, with the cornerstone-laying ceremony 
on March 18, 1969, attended by Frank Borman, astronaut com- 
mander of the Apollo 8 flight of Christmas 1968. 

Maintenance Building and Power Plant. The first addition to the 
power plant in my administration took place in 1960 (a feed-water 
heating unit) and 1961 (a new boiler) to provide the extra heat 
needed for the new IAA building that was later to become Sherff 
Hall and also for the first addition to Memorial Student Center. In 
the summer of 1964 another feed-water heater was installed. 

By 1966 the second enlargement of the student center was in 
progress, Munsell was also under construction, and the new 
library was being planned. All this additional space would require 
much more heat, and so a second major enlargement was under- 
taken. 

Also in 1966, with the imminent razing of Old North Hall, 
something had to be done to replace the maintenance shops that 
had for years resided in the basement of that building. According- 
ly, some lots were purchased on Emerson Street immediately east 
of the powerhouse, and on April 20, 1966, the executive committee 
of the Board approved plans for a new maintenance building and 
boiler house to be erected there. The maintenance building was to 
house not only the University shops but also the telephone 
switching equipment (telephones were soon to be installed in all 
student rooms), offices for the superintendent of buildings and 
grounds, and a commodious garage for University vehicles. The 

40 



entire complex of maintenance building and expanded power 
plant was completed in November of 1967, at a cost of about 
$475,000. 

Underground Cables. Up until 1966 all electrical power to the 
various campus buildings came in via overhead cables. Being thus 
exposed, the cables were subject to the hazards of weather, 
especially thunderstorms and ice storms, and there were frequent 
outages. Moreover, the increasing maze of overhead wires was 
becoming decidedly unsightly and potentially dangerous. 

On the advice of electrical engineers, we began in the spring of 
1966 to install multi-channel underground tiling that would carry 
not only the electrical lines but also, when needed, telephone 
lines, TV cable, etc. By late summer of 1966, the installation was 
completed for that part of the campus south of Beecher Street. 
Then on September 7, 1966, the executive committee of the Board 
authorized us to extend this project to Memorial Gymnasium, 
Magill Hall, and Franklin Hall (now called Dolan Hall), all north 
of Beecher Street. Total cost: $134,307. 

Ail-Weather Asphalt Track. Wilder Field, Wesleyan's athletic 
field, had been in use since its purchase in 1893. It was named for 
William Henry Wilder, president from 1888 to 1898. The stadium 
was erected in 1937, and about that same time a cinder track was 
constructed around the outside of the football field. 

The completion of the Fred Young Field House in 1962 gave 
added stimulus to the entire athletic program at Wesleyan. 
Increased attention began to be devoted to the so-called minor 
sports, and to track and field events in particular. The University 
was losing out by comparison, not only with her sister colleges of 
the College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin (CCIW) but even 
with many of the high schools. So, under the leadership of Jack 
Horenberger and Bob Keck, a drive was made among the alumni 
who had participated in intercollegiate sports here to raise the 
approximately $30,000 required to put in an all-weather track, with 
a rubber-asphalt composition surface. 

The executive committee authorized the signing of the contract 
on September 7, 1966, and the job was completed in good time for 
track meets the next spring. 

Conference Office Building. For many years prior to my arrival 
there had been certain offices of the Central Illinois Conference of 
the Methodist Church located on the Illinois Wesleyan campus 
(e.g., Conference treasurer, and secretaries for missions, 
evangelism, education, etc.). At first, these offices were in Buck 
Memorial Library, but by 1958 they had been moved to a nearby 
University-owned house located on the piece of Prairie Street 
which at that time extended into the Wesleyan campus. When we 
began to clear the site for the erection of McPherson Theatre in 
1961, this house had to be removed, and these offices were then 
moved to Duration Hall. 

By 1962 the Conference was sensing the need for a building of its 

41 



own. We at the University felt there would be both symbolic and 
relational values in keeping these offices close to the campus. So, 
on October 23, 1962, the trustees approved a letter of intent which 
the administration had drawn up, in which we offered to the 
Central Illinois Conference a long-term, rent-free lease of a lot at 
the corner of Park and University streets for the erection of a 
Conference office building. Plans for this were to be approved by 
the Board to assure general conformity to the architectural style of 
the campus, and the University was to be given first priority for 
the purchase of the building in case the Conference ever wanted to 
sell it. The executive committee of the Board approved the plans 
on September 4, 1963, and by late summer of 1964 the building was 
completed. 

Meanwhile, in August of 1963, the one remaining building (a 
former street-car barn) of the old Illinois Power Company 
property, standing just to the rear of the proposed Conference 
office building, spontaneously collapsed. It had been purchased 
by the University back in 1960 when the entire IPC property was 
acquired, and had been rented temporarily to a grain company for 
the storage of corn. Its collapse was a spectacular event that 
poured thousands of bushels of corn into University Street, and 
required a week or more for clean-up. 

The remains of this old building were then cleared away, the 
entire lot was smoothed up, and in April 1968, was blacktopped for 
a parking lot to be shared by the University and the Conference 
offices. 

Summary. A somewhat better idea of the rather intense building 
activity that took place during the "Bertholf Years," representing 
an outlay of well over $8,000,000, can perhaps be gained by looking 
at the accompanying graph, where a black bar represents the 
period of time during which each facility was under construction. 
It will be noted that at several periods activity was in progress on 
four or more projects at the same time. 



42 



to 



CO 



h CO m 

H s ® 



DS5 — 
~ £ s 

sd ^> <-• 
m 5 — 

DC SS 
H ^ th 

X W CD 

98- 

H > ^ 

5 > LO 

gc£2 

pq ^ co 

w w 
*X 

< 

O 



oc 
c 



° 5 

2 | 

0) CO 

2 .£ 

a, g 

o nd 

a < 

O co 



< 



O 



cd 

» s 

3 o 

o I 

E 

oc 
c 
p 
o 

T3 ^ 
CD p^ 



CD 
U 

c 

CD 

13 co 

s 1 

CD 

"6 

CO 



CD 



03 



c 
en 

00 



03 03 
CD U 



s 6 



CD 
CO 



T3 
< 



Ch (D 

03 rj 

.2P £ 

CO ^ 



T3 

O 
f-, 
00 
(-1 

CD 
C 



CD 

2 ° 

co O 
CD PQ 



■S O 



T3 
< 






o 

CO 


CO 
C-i 

CD 


o 


> 




00 


co 


C-i 


n 


CD 


CD 


D 


5 



03 
X 

c 
o 

co 

c 

CD 
> 

CD 



t-i 

c 

CD 

u 

"3 

CD JZJ 

T3 03 

CO CD 



-13 
< 

c 

CO CM 



u 

c 

CD 

T3 

"co 
CD 

04 



oo 
c 



en 

CD 

u 

c 

03 

c 

CD 



U 
03 
c_ 

H 



03 



03 

C3 7P 

< J 



T-HCNlCO^LOCDt^CXJOiOT-lCsJCO 



LO CD t^ 



43 




ACADEMIC CHANGES 

Although my administration at IWU will probably come to be 
known as the "Building Years" because of the 10 or so major 
building projects completed during that decade, my major interest, 
actually, was in the academic program. I suppose I had been a 
teacher and an academic dean too long to be able to forget the 
classroom, even though most of my time had to be directed to 
public relations and administration. Hence I took a very personal 
interest in the curriculum of the University. 

I shall not attempt to deal with all the curricular changes, of 
course. That would be next to impossible, for every alert teacher is 
constantly tinkering with the courses he or she teaches, and can be 
expected to propose some change every few years. As new 
developments occur in a field of study, new courses are always 
being added; and occasionally a faculty member may even suggest 
the dropping of a course from the college catalog! But I shall men- 
tion what might be considered the more important changes — and 
in most cases from a point of view that extends back a few years 
into Wesleyan history. 

One change that was apparently fairly well decided by the 
faculty before I arrived was to do away with the two-year program 
in Vocational Business Training, leading to an associate in arts 
degree. This seemed to me also to be out of place in a liberal arts 
college, and I was glad to agree to the recommendation. It was 
approved by the Board of Trustees on May 16, 1959. 

The first major change in the academic program that I faced was 
whether or not to proceed with plans for a Collegiate (bac- 
calaureate) School of Nursing at Wesleyan. The University was 
already involved in a cooperative arrangement with Brokaw 
Hospital, and had been for some 30 years. The program was essen- 
tially a three-year diploma program conducted by the hospital, 
with collegiate work added on. One year of college work, 
according to the then-current plan, was to be taken by the student 
at Wesleyan before entering the Brokaw school, to be followed by 
27 months of work at Brokaw, and this in turn by a senior year at 
Wesleyan, for a B.S. in nursing degree. 

But the Wesleyan faculty, I found, was not greatly pleased with 
this, for the nursing students were generally not prepared for 
senior courses, and tended not to do well. And the nursing profes- 
sionals were also not enthusiastic about the program, for their 
nursing courses were taught primarily by practicing physicians, 
not by professional nurses. The nursing profession wanted to make 
its profession autonomous like other professions. That is, it wanted 
to have student candidates taught by educationally qualified 

44 



nurse-teachers, in a collegiate setting, using hospitals as 
laboratories. It wanted its students selected with as high a set of 
standards as any other collegiate student, and wanted them to 
compete in the classroom with all other collegians. It wanted a cur- 
riculum in which the nursing courses are mostly in the junior and 
senior years, as is true of the curriculum for other collegiate "ma- 
jors." 

Dr. Holmes had alerted me to these matters to some extent 
before I arrived, and I had also made a visit to Sacramento State 
College in California before I left there, to talk with the 
administrators of their new baccalaureate program. So I was pret- 
ty well oriented. But my inclination was to be slow and cautious, 
for I had been warned against taking on the heavy expense 
involved in anything connected with the medical sciences. 

Wesleyan's director of the School of Nursing, when I arrived, 
was Miss Margaret Griffin, R.N. She was a strong advocate of the 
"baccalaureate school" concept, and the more she and I talked, the 
more I became convinced that the baccalaureate program with 
nursing as a major was the direction of the future so far as the 
nursing profession was concerned, and that this was destined 
eventually largely to replace the diploma programs operated by 
hospitals. Miss Griffin also spoke to the entire faculty on March 23, 
1959, on the collegiate school philosophy, and there was general 
agreement that a collegiate program of nursing education was a 
"natural" for Wesleyan. 

We still did not know much about the actual cost, but we went 
ahead with plans, which gained trustee approval, to start such a 
school in the fall of 1959. Brokaw Hospital agreed that as our new 
school developed, the hospital would gradually phase out its three- 
year diploma program, but would continue to be our main nursing 
laboratory for clinical experience. And because of the many nurs- 
ing alumni of the Brokaw school who would be "orphans" if the 
name Brokaw were dropped, we agreed to name the new school 
"The Brokaw Collegiate School of Nursing of Illinois Wesleyan 
University." 

Meanwhile, Miss Griffin found it necessary to resign before the 
new school actually started, and we found a new director in the 
person of Mrs. Dorothy Cobb, R.N., of Alabama. The year 1959-60 
was one of exploration. The program was new and not very well 
defined. The students lived in Mecherle Hall at Brokaw and had 
their nursing instruction there, but walked to the Wesleyan 
campus for their other courses. 

In the fall of 1960, after several months of negotiation, Dr. Mary 
Shanks was employed as director of the School. She was a 
graduate of the Brokaw diploma school and also of Illinois 
Wesleyan, and had earned a master's degree from Catholic 
University and the doctorate from Columbia. She was very much 
the professional in her field, was thoroughly sold on the "col- 
legiate school" concept, and knew exactly what she wanted in 

45 



order to give Wesleyan's new school a quality program. 

When she started to tell us all the requirements for accreditation 
as a baccalaureate program, the Board of Trustees began to back 
off. At a special meeting of the Board held on December 7, 1960, 
there was considerable feeling expressed that the program ought 
actually to be terminated before we got in any deeper. After long 
discussion, however, the trustees voted by a small majority to con- 
tinue the program at least until the fall of 1961, to see if by that 
time additional sources of income could be discovered. Dr. Shanks 
proved to be a good organizer, a most careful planner, and a con- 
vincing advocate. There was opposition to be overcome also 
among some of the physicians, who were not sure that nurses 
could really train nurses to do the things physicians wanted done, 
and were afraid that the clinical part of the training would be too 
much curtailed by the inclusion of all the "academic" work 
required for a bachelor's degree. 

Dr. Shanks and her staff convinced us to give the new approach 
a real trial, however, and on October 24, 1961, the trustees voted to 
continue the school indefinitely. During the year 1961-62, a new 
revised curriculum was adopted, so that by the fall of 1962 the 
school was solidly established, with an enrollment of 40 freshmen, 
25 sophomores, 24 juniors, and 6 seniors, plus 4 part-time students. 
Nursing proved to be a popular study. Almost every year the 
admissions to the School were filled before those of any other 
school of the University; hence, the selectivity was high, and the 
grades made by nursing students tended to rank near the top. 
Three years after Dr. Shanks arrived, and before the first BSN stu- 
dent had graduated, the program achieved National League for 
Nursing accreditation, a virtually unheard-of accomplishment for 
so new a program. 

On October 9, 1965, we dedicated the Edgar M. Stevenson Hall 
of Nursing (the refurbished old science building), which gave the 
School the classroom and office space it needed for its 15 faculty 
members and 175 students. 

Psychology is a subject that has apparently been taught at 
Illinois Wesleyan from the beginning. At any rate, it is listed in one 
of the first University catalogs that we have, the one for 1858. But 
for the first 60 years it was considered a somewhat minor part of 
the department of philosophy. 

In 1911 this department was expanded to include also education 
and religion. Then, in 1915 religion was separated off into a depart- 
ment of its own, leaving education and philosophy together, with 
the one course in psychology still listed under philosophy. 

In 1919, education was separated from philosophy, and each 
department included two courses in psychology. When the 
divisional plan was adopted in 1932, psychology (which had by 
now grown to seven courses) was divided, four courses remaining 
in Division I (first named philosophy and religion, then changed in 
1935 to humanities) and three courses going with education to the 

46 



division of social sciences. 

Psychology gradually decreased as a humanities subject— down 
to one course in 1940 and to zero in 1963 — while it increased in the 
social sciences — up to 10 courses in 1949, when it attained the 
status of a separate department, and offered a major. 

This was the situation when I arrived. The work was regarded as 
a social science, closely related to education. But a new emphasis 
was arising, a more "scientific" interest in experimental psy- 
chology, with laboratory work involving living rats, guinea pigs, 
pigeons, etc. So, in the fall of 1961, psychology as a department 
under the chairmanship of Roger Ulrich, was transferred to the 
division of natural sciences and was given quarters with 
laboratory space in Old North Hall. When that building was torn 
down in 1966, psychology was moved to the ground floor of the 
renovated Stevenson Hall School of Nursing building, where it has 
remained ever since. Educational psychology, however, has 
remained with education and a course in the psychology of music 
education was for many years taught in the School of Music. 

In Sociology there were two main changes during my decade. 
The first had to do with Social Work. This had been first men- 
tioned in the 1940-41 catalog, in the section on pre-professional 
curricula, as "an expanding vocational field." By 1961 the field had 
expanded to such an extent that we felt a major in social work was 
justified, and this was first announced in the 1963-64 catalog. 

The other sociology changed had to do with Anthropology. This 
had become so popular that on the recommendation of the 
sociology faculty the name of the department was changed in the 
1967-68 catalog to the department of sociology and anthropology, 
and the next year a major in anthropology was announced. 

Speech and Drama. The changing relationship between speech 
and drama through the years at Illinois Wesleyan reflects, I 
suspect, the situation in colleges generally. In the early days, 
before the turn of the century, the emphasis was mainly on public 
speaking — elocution, argumentation and debate, oratory, and 
dramatic reading— and, of course, on Shakespeare, and other 
dramatic literature. And for most of this time all Wesleyan stu- 
dents were required to take some work in public speaking. An 
indication of the importance attached to this subject is given by the 
fact that in 1900, when the University first divided its curriculum 
into "groups" (what we would now probably call "divisions"), 
oratory constituted one of the nine groups. Also, from 1900 to 1911 
there was an affiliated "School of Oratory" listed in the catalog, a 
specialized two-year diploma program. 

Dramatic art was taught as far back as 1911, when it appeared in 
the School of Music in the form of private lessons. From 1925 to 
1927 the University had a "School of Speech," and this school 
offered two courses (12 hours) in play production. It was at this 
time that "Masquers" was organized, which soon sponsored the 
Beta chapter of Theta Alpha Phi. After the demise of this original 

47 



School of Speech, the drama instruction was taken over by the 
department of public speaking (later, department of speech or 
department of English and speech), although dramatic art con- 
tinued to be offered in the School of Music until the School of 
Dramatics was organized in 1948. 

Meanwhile, public speaking was gradually hanging from oratory 
to a more widely useful type of speech training, applicable to 
teaching, business, politics, group dynamics, radio, and all sorts of 
practical situations. A major in speech was first offered in 1928, 
and by 1946 the department was offering emphases in public 
address, dramatics, radio, and "speech re-education." 

In 1948 the drama courses were all pulled out of the Liberal Arts 
College and the School of Music and were placed in a new School 
of Dramatics, with Lawrence E. Tucker as director. The degree 
given by the new school was the bachelor of fine arts. Three years 
later the School of Dramatics was enlarged and re-named the 
School of Dramatics and Speech, but the same subjects could also 
be pursued in the College of Liberal Arts leading to the B.A. 
degree. 

If the reader is confused by this kaleidoscope of changing 
relationships, you can imagine how a new president was confused 
when he arrived on the scene in 1958. During the decade that fol- 
lowed we made only two main changes in the speech-drama 
organization. One was to move the department of speech from the 
division of humanities to the division of social sciences under 
the leadership of Marie Robinson. The other was to remove the 
speech courses from the School of Dramatics and Speech, change 
its name to School of Drama, and give that School a fine new 
theatre building (McPherson Hall, 1963) in which to work. 

Business. The 1958-68 decade also witnessed the beginning of a 
great new interest on the part of students in business courses. 
Computers were coming into use, government regulations were 
increasing, taxation was greatly increasing in complexity, and 
business was becoming more world-wide in its operations. 

These and other considerations led us in 1967 to combine the 
departments of business administration, economics and insurance 
into a subdivision of the division of social sciences. The next year 
we set up a fourth division of the College of Liberal Arts, under the 
name of business and economics, and made Dr. William T. Beadles 
its director. Some measure of the size of the new division is 
indicated by the fact that even in that first year 44 courses were 
offered. 

The most distinctive component of business at IWU had been 
Insurance. It was first listed in the catalog back in 1929-30. At that 
time it was a single three-hour course in the department of 
economics, named simply "Insurance." In 1932-33 it became 
"Mathematics of Life Insurance." In 1935-36 it was increased to 
two courses, "Fundamentals of Life Insurance," and "Life 
Insurance Salesmanship." In 1938-39 the subject was back to one 

48 



course called "General Insurance," but the next year a more 
stable pattern was adopted, consisting of one course in "Fun- 
damentals of Life Insurance" and a second one in "Fundamentals 
of Property Insurance." This arrangement continued essentially 
unchanged for the next 16 years. 

In 1955-56, however, the property insurance course was 
expanded to six hours, and a new one in casualty insurance was 
added, making a total of 12 hours offered. Then, two years later 
(1957-58) insurance was made a deparment, and offered a major 
for the first time. 

This was essentially the way I found it on arrival. Professor 
Beadles had been associated with the work ever since it began in 
1929, and the State Farm Insurance Company had become so 
pleased with our program that it began, about this time, to give us 
an annual gift to help with the expenses. During my decade at the 
University there was no great change in curriculum, except that 
the internship program was added. This gave students the oppor- 
tunity, after completing three years toward the major, of working 
for a commercial company for a 10-week period during the sum- 
mer, thus gaining valuable practical experience. 

The "Divided Semester" Plan. It had been brewing in my mind 
for several years that something should be done to eliminate the 
"lame duck" portion of the first semester — those three weeks or so 
between the Christmas-New Year vacation and the final examina- 
tions near the end of January. I also saw a great need to make more 
opportunity for creative instruction, for increased student motiva- 
tion, and for stimulating students to assume more responsibility 
for their own learning. 

Although the first of these objectives (eliminating the January 
portion of the first semester) could have been accomplishd by 
going to a quarter-system calendar, this would not do anything in 
particular for the other objectives. So I began to study those 
experiments which a few colleges were making in the early 1960s 
in which the first semester ended before Christmas, and the next 
4-6 weeks, during January and sometimes early February, were 
devoted to highly unconventional studies of various sorts. 

Florida Presbyterian College (now called Eckerd College) was 
one of these institutions, so Martha and I visited that campus dur- 
ing one of our mid-winter trips to speak to Florida alumni groups. 

After formulating some preliminary plans I talked the matter 
over with my cabinet, and decided to propose a "14-5-14" plan: 14 
weeks of fall semester plus 5 short-term weeks plus 14 weeks of a 
spring semester. Accordingly, early in January of 1963, as the stu- 
dents returned from Christmas vacation, I called in the editor of 
the Argus and outlined the plan — the reasons for it and the results 
I hoped would be achieved by it. The idea struck the editor so 
favorably that she got out a special edition on January 11, 1963, set- 
ting forth the plan (the only special edition of the Argus to be 
published during my administration). 

49 



On February 4 I presented the idea to the faculty and appointed 
an ad hoc committee to study the plan. In order to enable teachers 
to compress 16 weeks into 14 weeks I suggested we increase the 
class periods from 50 to 60 minutes each. The first report of the 
committee came on May 20. The idea was good, they said, but 
there were too many scheduling difficulties. And music and 
language teachers were afraid that the 5-week short-term would 
break disastrously into the continuity of practice discipline. 

I persuaded the faculty to continue the study, however, and sug- 
gested that instead of a strict 14-5-14 calendar we might use a 13- 
3V2-16 scheme; that is, simply break the fall semester into a long 
term of 13 weeks and a short term of 3V2 weeks. During the fall 
long term students would take one course less than heretofore, and 
teachers would teach one course less. During the short term, then, 
each student would take only one course and each teacher would 
teach only one. But the character of most short term courses, I 
hoped, would differ markedly from that of the "regular" courses: 
there would be a minimum of lecturing and a maximum of 
independent work in the laboratory, library, studio, hospital, or in 
the "field" away from the campus. As for the 16-week spring 
semester, that would continue as heretofore without change. 

The study was continued during the following year, and on April 
13, 1964, the ad hoc committee made its final report. It said that 
faculty opinion was still much divided and that the matter was 
therefore being referred back to me for final decision, with the 
promise that the faculty would go along with my decision, 
whichever way it went. Well, I was ready to decide, and told the 
faculty at once that my decision would be to go forward with the 
13-3V2-16 plan; that we would use the year 1964-65 to perfect the 
plan and prepare for the necessary change, and would put it into 
effect in the fall of 1965. 

I was most grateful for the faculty cooperation we received dur- 
ing 1964-65 as we worked through the many changes necessary in 
order to start the new program. Students on the whole reacted 
favorably, especially to the freedom allowed by the short-term 
courses. Some dissatisfaction developed later with the imbalance 
between a 13-week fall semester and a 16-week semester in the 
spring. So, after a few years experience, and after I had retired, 
another change was made, allowing the fall semester to start 
somewhat earlier, so that a 14-4-14 calendar, about the same as had 
been proposed in the first place, became a reality. 

College Credit in Escrow. Lee Short, as director of admission, 
had often expressed the wish that we could find a way of 
accelerating the progress of students so that they could finish col- 
lege in less than four full years, and thus save some tuition money. 
He figured this would be a good talking point, especially with 
parents. We also realized that it was good business to keep our 
campus facilities as active as possible during the summer, and that 
summer teaching would provide a welcome addition to the income 

50 



of teachers. 

It was Lee himself, I think, who first put these two ideas together 
and came up with the concept of "College Credit in Escrow" 
(CCIE). The plan was to offer to above-average high school stu- 
dents who had just completed their junior year an opportunity to 
take a three-hour college-level course during the summer and hold 
the credit in escrow to apply toward a college degree later. 

We put this plan into effect in the summer of 1963, offering at 
that time a general sociology course. Any fears we may have had 
that such high school students were not ready for a college-level 
course were put to rest by the remarkable success of the 10 stu- 
dents in that first class, and the plan, with slight modification, has 
been in use ever since. 

Summer Independent Study. It was also in the summer of 1963 
that we re-activated the old independent study program. This had 
lain dormant for many years because the general opinion among 
academicians was that this sort of program had been abused, 
allowing students to accumulate credits without proper guidance 
and hence at a low level of quality. 

To forestall this abuse we introduced a new element into the 
program, namely that any student who wanted to earn credit dur- 
ing the summer would have to spend five days on the campus with 
the instructor of the course before leaving for the summer vaca- 
tion. During this five-day period the instructor was to go carefully 
over an outline of the course, make clear the course requirements, 
give out assignments, bibliography, etc., schedule the time when 
each paper was due, and just how, when, and where the final 
examination would be administered. Students who were willing to 
enter into such a "contract" were then allowed to leave the 
campus and do the assigned work entirely on their own. They 
were, of course, to use libraries and other resources in their own 
local communities. 

One big advantage to the student was that the fee for such credit 
was much less than for the same credit in a conventionally taught 
class. 

From the very first experience with this program the reports by 
both students and teachers were good. Teachers reported that the 
quality of work done was on the average as good as that done in 
regular classes on the campus — much as they often times hated to 
admit this. 

Academic Challenge Electives. Everette Walker, academic 
dean, was, as I recall, the originator of this plan. The idea was to 
allow any upperclass student in good standing to include one 
"ACE" elective course in his or her program each semester, for 
which the only grade given would be either "credit" or "no- 
credit." When the grade of "credit" was given, the hours thus 
earned would apply toward graduation, but there would be no 
"grade-points" given, and the student's record would be neither 
hurt nor helped by having taken such a course. 

51 



Thus a student majoring in biology, let us say, could include dur- 
ing any of his or her final four semesters an elective course, say in 
dramatic literature, from an admired teacher. And even though 
the student might not do well in the course compared to English 
majors, by designating it an ACE course, he or she could get a taste 
of the nature and extent of dramatic literature without suffering 
any harm to the grade point average — a thing which might 
otherwise decrease the chances of getting into a graduate school. 

Dean Walker and the dean's council proposed this to the faculty 
in April of 1967, where it was approved, and was put into effect 
that fall. 

Other curricular changes that perhaps deserve mention include 
the following: 

Beginning in 1959 a "minor" in Journalism was offered and has 
been available ever since. 

In the spring of 1962 the trustees approved our limiting the B.S. 
degree to nursing, business administration, insurance, physical 
education, speech, and education. 

At the same time they approved the requiring of two years (or 
equivalent competence) in a foreign language for all B.A. degrees. 

In the spring of 1963 the trustees confirmed a contract with the 
University of Illinois School of Engineering whereby a student 
after three years of pre-engineering work at Wesleyan would 
receive a Wesleyan bachelor's degree upon completing one year of 
the engineering work at Illinois, and the Illinois engineering 
degree upon completion of the second year. 

Also at this time some courses in Far Eastern Culture were 
added. 

In November 1965 the faculty approved the re-offering of 
courses in Astronomy, and the addition of some work in 
Astrophysics. 

Graduate Work. Starting back in the 1870s, Illinois Wesleyan 
acquired a bit of notoriety by offering graduate work leading to the 
doctor of philosophy degree. This in itself was not too unusual for 
those days, but the unique feature of Wesleyan's program was that 
it could all be done in absentia, i.e., by correspondence! The 
program continued for some 30 years, and it is very interesting to 
look over the shelf of approximately 250 bound doctoral disserta- 
tions housed in the archives section of Wesleyan's Sheean Library. 
By early 20th Century criteria however, such a program was con- 
sidered substandard, and enrollment was closed on July 1, 1906. 

From then until 1932, no graduate work was offered at IWU. But 
in that year the School of Music began to accept candidates for the 
master of music degree. In 1943 this work was approved by the 
National Association of Schools of Music in its first list of 
accredited schools, and in 1951 a master of music education degree 
program was started. 

The only other graduate work given in my administration was by 
the natural science division — work leading to the degree of 

52 



master of science teaching. 

The decision to go into this program was made before my 
arrival. It was promoted by Dr. Wayne Wantland, professor of 
biology and chairman of the division of natural science, and was 
encouraged by the Science Advisory Council which had been 
formed only shortly before I came. This M.S.T. program consisted 
of 30 hours of graduate work taken in three eight-week summer 
sessions plus a final essay worth six hours. It was financed by 
grants from the National Science Foundation. The sessions started 
in the summer of 1958 and continued through the summer of 1968, 
11 sessions in all. 

I was proud of the graduate work done during my presidency, 
and justifiably so, I think, because we turned out some 60 excellent 
professional musicians, and a total of 149 master teachers of 
science who are having a most healthy effect on the quality of 
science teaching in the high schools in which they teach. 

New Appointments. There is not a great deal a college president 
can do in a direct way to improve the institutional curriculum or 
the quality of instruction. But there is a great deal he can do 
indirectly in these areas and in the atmosphere of the institution 
by the influence he exerts in the selection of teachers and staff. 

In Chapter 2 I have already mentioned most of the fine faculty 
and staff members I found here on arrival, all of whom had been 
appointed by my predecessors. Now I should like to mention some 
100 or so additional appointees employed during my decade, who 
have given outstanding service to the University, many of them 
continuing on after I retired, to constitute perhaps the greatest 
legacy I could leave to Illinois Wesleyan. 

In art, I think of Anthony Vestuto, Barton McNeil, and Ed 
McCullough; in biology, W. W. Darlington, Frank Kulfinski, and 
Joseph Austin; in business administration Greg Gardner, and 
Robert Harrington. Joseph Collins, followed by Wendell Hess, For- 
rest Frank, and David Braught made a strong team in chemistry; in 
economics, Yau Pik Chau. In drama I recall James Ascareggi and 
John Bergstrom. In education I appointed Clifford Pfeltz and 
Emerson Miller, and moved Lucile Klauser from English to educa- 
tion. 

In English, Frank Thompson, Justus Pearson, Harvey Beutner, 
and William McDonald come to mind. Paul Bushnell was 
appointed to history in 1966. In insurance we appointed Abbas 
Yousri, Campbell Evans, and Don Strand. The library has had the 
services of Alleyne Vandervoort, Wave Noggle, John Westall, and 
Bob Mowery. In mathematics we brought back Evelyn Wantland 
after a long absence, and added George Polites, and Ron 
Sandstrom. And in modern languages we have had the good ser- 
vices of Dieter Michel, Lydia Holm, and Jose Rencurrell. 

There were a dozen or so appointments in music that I recall: 
Marjorie Kingland, John McGrosso, Robert Bankert, Robert 
Donalson, David Nott, Carole Thibodeaux, Norman Hessert, 

53 



Abram Plum, Paul Heyboer, Richard Hishman, Susan Brandon, 
and Sammy Scifres. Likewise in nursing there was a considerable 
number: Mary Shanks, Annabelle Hartranft, Dorothy Kennedy, 
Elizabeth Cloud, Alberta Hilton, Jane Gordon, Eleanor Allen, 
Carmin Jimison, Mary Larson, Mildred Pflederer, and Bernadine 
Drake. 

In philosophy there were John VanderWaal and Larry Colter; in 
physical education Joan Peppard and Dennis Bridges; in physics 
Ray Wilson, Gary Kessler, and Herman Detweiler; and in political 
science Donald Brown and John Faust. 

We were fortunate in having Roger Ulrich and Peter Wolff just 
at the time when we were moving the psychology work from the 
social science to the natural science division. Later we also had 
Roger Olsen in psychology. The department of religion blossomed 
with a strong faculty consisting of James Whitehurst, Richard 
Stegner, William White, Jerry Stone, and G. L. Story. It was during 
this decade also that Emily Dale, Paul Miller, and Max Pape were 
all appointed in sociology, and Helen Herren and Helen Foster in 
home economics. John Burt also served well in the department of 
speech. 

A number of administrative and staff personnel appointed dur- 
ing those years also deserve grateful mention: Tom Diener as dean 
of men, followed by Don Ruthenberg; Everette Walker as dean of 
the University; Lynn Nichelson as financial aid officer; Dan 
Oborn as registrar, followed by Patricia Reid, followed by Jim Bar- 
bour; Don Reid in development, and also Jim Ridenour and Milton 
Moody; Dave Hughes and Jim Ruoti in admission; Glenn Dodds in 
placement; Don Eddy as director of the student center; John Alex- 
ander in central services, followed by Ron Campbell; Harold 
Thompson in public relations and publicity, followed by Ed 
Alsene; Chet Shiers and Roger Brucker in maintenance; and John 
King in security. 

There are doubtless others that I have overlooked, but these, at 
least, have my admiration and my gratitude for taking a share of 
the responsibility in what was definitely a 10-year team effort. 

And while I am recalling those who shared responsibility with 
me during that 1958-68 decade, I must certainly include my wife, 
Martha. We had agreed when I took the job that she would keep 
her participation in University affairs strictly in the background, 
and this she did most faithfully. But her instincts and insight have 
always been amazingly keen, and I have learned to listen to them 
with great respect. Moreover, her hospitality and concern for 
individuals and her skill in housekeeping and food preparation 
(she was a home-economics major) enabled us to have a social 
relationship with the faculty that was invaluable in the develop- 
ment of good rapport and the speedy incorporation of new faculty 
families into the Wesleyan circle of friendship. 

So, in spite of her avoidance of the limelight, she was actually 
the most valuable member of my "support team." 

54 




The Bertholfs and the Walkers greet new students. 




Above: Christmas '59 Carol Sing. Below: Dr. Bertholf, in freshman beanie (center) chats 
with faculty members Schultz and Neumeyer. 




55 




Above: Dr. Bertholf with Carolyn Flatt 
Rupert and at right, with Dr. Martin 
Luther King, who spoke at a campus 
convocation. 





Professor Fred Brian, (standing, right) makes a presentation to Dr. and Mrs. Bertholf at 
the second of several faretcell parties at the retirement of the fourteenth president. 



56 




PRESIDENTIAL 
RELATIONSHIPS 

I had previously seen enough of the work of a president to 
realize that his position is primarily one of establishing and main- 
taining good relationships. It is his job to cultivate good feelings 
and team work among (and sometimes within) all the following 
groups: the faculty and staff; the student body, particularly its 
leaders; the trustees; the alumni; the church leaders; the local 
business and professional community; those interested primarily 
in athletics; the Greek-letter clubs and their alumni; the parents of 
current students and prospective students; high school principals 
and counselors; the administrators of sister colleges and univer- 
sities; various professional educational organizations; a great 
variety of prospective donors; and the public in general. 

Dr. Merrill J. Holmes, my predecessor, had done an admirable 
job at cultivating good relationships, hence my job was much 
easier than it might otherwise have been. I found that the Univer- 
sity had a good reputation locally. Dr. Holmes was much loved and 
admired personally. (*) The business office paid the bills prompt- 
ly; our students behaved reasonably well, so as not to disturb 
many of the neighbors; many of our faculty members were active 
in church and civic affairs in the community; and our rivalry with 
Illinois State Normal University, though intense at the time of cer- 
tain sports events, did not extend beyond that, so that we were 
able to carry on many cooperative projects with I.S.N.U. During 
one of my visits to the campus, after being elected but before tak- 
ing office, Dr. Holmes took me over to call on I.S.N.U. President 
Robert Bone, and I learned at that time what a delightful person he 
is. During the succeeding years I had many contacts with him and 
Mrs. Bone, and without exception they were extremely cordial 
meetings. 

Relations with Faculty. Most college administrators, I suspect, 
have some sort of a "retreat" with their faculty members just 
before the opening of the fall term. My staff and I gave con- 

* Some indication of the high regard in which Dr. Holmes was held is given by the 
following editorial which appeared in The Daily Pantograph on November 18, 
1957 : 

COMMENT AND OPINION 

By The Pantograph 

ILLINOIS WESLEYAN'S FINEST 10 YEARS 

It was typical of Merrill J. Holmes that he told the Board of Illinois Wesleyan 
University three years in advance of his plans to retire as president of the Univer- 
sity. He wanted to give them ample time to set about to select a successor. 

While Dr. Holmes will continue in the presidency until next July 31, it is fitting 
that some recognition be given his work now at the time Dr. Lloyd M. Bertholf is 
being announced as his successor. 

Footnote continued on page 58. 

57 



siderable thought to this program at IWU. For the first six years 
these meetings were overnight sessions held at the church camp at 
East Bay on Lake Bloomington. Often, but not always, we brought 
in someone from the outside to give us perspective or advice or 
inspiration regarding what was projected as a special emphasis or 
program for that year. 

At my first faculty retreat, September 7-8, 1958, however, we 
relied entirely upon ourselves, and dealt with the general nature 
and purpose of Illinois Wesleyan— the problem of quality, how to 
develop creative thinking, how to improve academic counseling, 
and how to emphasize and encourage the "liberal" aspects of a 
liberal arts education. At the close of the retreat I presented a 
brief paper entitled "Why Illinois Wesleyan University?" It was 
not intended to be a summary of what we had concluded from our 
discussion but rather a statement of my own point of view as to 
what a church-related liberal arts institution should aim to be. It 
was never adopted officially by the faculty (I did not ask them to 
adopt it), but I present it here in toto because it allows you, the 
reader, to peer rather deeply into my own educational biases so 
far as private liberal arts colleges are concerned. 

WHY ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY? 

Illinois Wesleyan University, from its founding, has been a 
church-related, non-tax-supported, liberal arts institution of 
higher education. Although proud of its long sponsorship by the 
Methodist Church, it is free from sectarian bias in both 
administration and instruction. It accepts without prejudice stu- 
dents of any faith, race, or nationality, and of both sexes. In the 
selection of faculty members its policy is to appoint only men and 
women who profess a religious faith and who are active in some 
church, but not necessarily the Methodist Church, or even a 
Protestant church. 

It is the whole purpose of the University to make available to its 
students a college education of the Illinois Wesleyan variety. That 
is, it attempts to bring together a highly competent and skilled 

Illinois Wesleyan has had its greatest growth under the leadership of Dr. Holmes. 
Its capital assets have been doubled in 10 years. The University is operating in the 
black. During his tenure it has added seven buildings and others are in the works. 

In the decade Dr. Holmes has been at the helm Illinois Wesleyan has gained in 
enrollment. There are in excess of 1,100 students today as compared with 650 at the 
peak before World War II. 

Courses have been enriched and academic standards raised. Wesleyan's reach 
into community activities has been extended and two-way relationships with the 
Methodist Church has been strengthened. 

Illinois Wesleyan has done an outstanding job in seeking to increase its financial 
position through good management before calling for support from the outside. 

This remarkable growth is due to the strong and wise leadership of Dr. Holmes. 
He has combined vision in planning with the ability to enlist the help of many able 
people and agencies in making these plans fruitful. 

His concern for others, his constant attention to details, his co-operative spirit 
combined with enlightened and consistent leadership have marked Dr. Holmes's 
administration. 

58 



group of teachers with a highly selected group of students 
(selected on the basis of intelligence, pre-college preparation, and 
character) in a learning situation provided with the necessary 
facilities (libraries, laboratories, studios, classrooms, dormitories, 
physical education facilities, social facilities, and the like), and 
characterized by seriousness of purpose, democratic procedures, 
and a spirit of comradeship, mutual respect, and reverence. 

I. A significant part of this "Illinois Wesleyan variety of 
education" can be called a liberal education. This has two major 
phases: 

A. One phase might be designated as the curricular phase. It 
includes courses making up approximately one-half of the 
baccalaureate curriculum designed to accomplish the follow- 
ing: 

1. The ability to use the English language clearly, correctly, 
and effectively, both in writing and speaking; the ability to 
read with discrimination, and the gaining of a sense of the 
significance of language in the cultural life of a people. 
Without requiring it for every degree, we nevertheless 
encourage every student to acquire at least a basic 
proficiency in the use of some foreign language. 

2. Awareness of the heritage of Western culture as revealed 
in masterpieces of literature and the arts from the ancient 
Greeks to the present, leading to discriminative enjoyment 
of contemporary literature and art. 

3. Acquaintance with the major philosophical and religious 
traditions, especially those having to do with the Christian 
faith, so as to be able to arrive at a sense of values which is 
confident and rational, and which is reflected in the stu- 
dent's character and conduct. 

4. Analysis of the major currents of history and of the opera- 
tion of contemporary political, social, and economic 
institutions in order to prepare the student for intelligent 
participation in social units large and small, far and near, 
and for actively fulfilling his obligations as an American 
citizen. 

5. Study of the major concepts and principles of the physical 
and biological world so as to understand and appreciate 
the fundamental nature of the world and of man, to adjust 
oneself to this world, and to develop the habits needed to 
maintain one's physical health and vigor. 

B. The other phase of liberal education might be called the 
supracurricular phase, since it is not related to any one 
course more than another, but often grows out of informal 
personal contact between student and teacher. The hoped- 
for outcomes here are: 

1. Skill in analyzing theories and arguments, application of 
the scientific method of solving problems, and practice in 
organizing and stating one's own thoughts and opinions. 

59 



2. Appreciation of and respect for other human personalities 
for what they are, and the ability to evaluate and 
appreciate their creative efforts. 

II. Another significant part of college education at Illinois 
Wesleyan is the pre-vocational area. This likewise has two phases: 

A. The curricular phase 

1. In order to prepare a student to earn a living immediately 
upon graduation, or to enter a professional graduate 
school, each student is required to pursue a major, which 
consists of a body of advanced courses in some one depart- 
ment plus supporting courses in related departments, the 
entire amount constituting approximately one-third to 
one-half of the total baccalaureate curriculum. 

2. The curriculum for the major should include the methods 
by which knowledge is attained in that field and should 
culminate in a seminar or investigational type of course in 
which the student is given the responsibility of looking up 
for himself from original sources or from nature itself the 
answer to some problem in his major field, or of creating 
out of his own mind an original literary or artistic or 
philosophical production. 

3. Wherever possible, a part of the preparation for a voca- 
tion should consist of observations of, and some cadet ser- 
vice in, the actual vocation itself. 

B. The non-curricular phase 

We would strive to inculcate the idea that a vocation is or 
should be a "calling," and that one who accepts such a call is 
in reality fitting into a Divine plan for his life. 

As I now read this over again after some 20 years I am not too 
well satisfied with the language used in expressing my thought, but 
I still think the statement gives a fair summary of what a college 
such as Illinois Wesleyan can and ought to try to do. 

Faculty Bulletin. It seemed to me important to have a regular 
news bulletin to keep teachers and staff members aware of such 
things as coming events, honors and achievements of faculty 
members, travels of the staff and the president as we attended 
professional meetings and performed tasks for the University, mis- 
cellaneous announcements and requests, and an occasional mes- 
sage from the president. Accordingly, I began on September 15, 
1958, to issue a weekly bulletin of one or two pages. We continued 
this faithfully each week of the regular sessions throughout my 
presidency. My secretary, Ruth Ward, soon took over the 
editorship, and did an excellent job. 

I took the opportunity every few weeks to include in the Bulletin 
either a quotation which seemed to me worthy of our attention, or 
an "editorial" which I had written myself. A sampling of each of 
these is given below. First, the "editorials": 

60 



EDITORIAL FROM THE PRESIDENT'S DESK— (1/7/59) 
What Is The Function of a College Teacher? 

It has been traditional with us who teach college classes 
that the function of the teacher is to present the material that 
is to be learned. In fact, we present ordinarily much more 
material than even the best student will learn, and we do it 
partly to impress the class with our own large stock of infor- 
mation. Students have come to expect us to present material, 
and the better ones can often pass the course without con- 
sulting any books at all, using merely their own class notes. 

But I wonder if this really is our proper function? Compare, 
for a moment, with the proper function of a parent. Would 
you not say that it is the parent's job to prepare the child to 
get along without the parent — that is, to get him ready, 
without too much delay, to meet the problems of life under 
his own power and without the parent's help? Just so, it seems 
to me, we might regard our proper function as that of prepar- 
ing students to progress along the road of learning without 
our help, and to do so as early in their college career as 
possible — even as freshmen in many cases. Instead of 
teaching students what to learn, ought we not, therefore, to be 
spending most of our time teaching them how to teach 
themselves? If the answer is in the affirmative, the conse- 
quences would be far-reaching. Let us discuss, over the cof- 
fee cups, perhaps, just what this would mean. 

Another appeared on January 28, 1959: 

Why Have Chapel Services? 

Various answers come to mind: 1) In a church-related col- 
lege it is "the thing to do." 2) It gives opportunity for 
leadership to those going into the ministry or other church 
vocations. 3) It gives the chapel choir a chance to sing. 4) It is 
good for students who like that sort of thing. 5) It enables our 
ministerial colleagues to practice their exegeses once in a 
while. 

Actually, from the interest which the faculty seems to take 
in chapel, one would judge that the above are the accepted 
reasons, so far as most faculty members are concerned. 

Let me state what is to me the all-important reason: the 
need for all of us, faculty and students alike, to worship, and 
what is more, to worship together. Can you think of anything 
that would do more to produce the kind of atmosphere we 
desire on this campus than for all of us voluntarily to worship 
together? I must say, I cannot. 

The following appeared on November 11, 1959: 

On the Importance of Morale 
I speak of morale not because I have noticed any lack of it, 
but only because experience has taught me that this is the 



61 



time of year when a little sagging may be expected — we begin 
to be tired, student response is not quite what we had hoped 
for, the weather is bad, and work piles up, and we get short- 
tempered. 

Let me suggest a good remedy: let's express appreciation to 
each other a little more — to the janitors, the buildings and 
grounds crew, the Memorial Student Center staff, the office 
force. Let's show appreciation, the teaching staff to the 
library staff, and vice versa; the administration staff to the 
teaching staff and vice versa; the music staff to the athletic 
staff, and vice versa; the business to the admission staff, and 
vice versa — and all the other combinations you can think of. 
And let's not forget the students, especially those who assume 
leadership responsibilities. 

It takes all of us as a team to operate this institution. 
Gratitude and loyalty to each other, I'm sure you will agree, 
are prerequisites to good team-work, which is good morale. 

In the middle of my second year as president I wrote the follow- 
ing, which I used over and over again in speeches, until it became 
a sort of "theme song" for my public appearances. 

An Attempt to Restate the 
Illinois Wesleyan Purpose 

The basic purpose of Illinois Wesleyan University is to 
provide a quality program in higher education with a three- 
fold emphasis: the liberal, the vocational, and the religious. 
Considered individually, these goals are not unique, but the 
desire here is not simply that these three shall be included in 
the four-year experience, but that there shall be a balanced, 
integrated, and continuous emphasis on all three. 

Translated into curriculum terms, this means that we must 
not only make sure that there shall be courses of a general 
nature, and courses of a professional nature, and courses in 
religion, but we should also like to make sure that every 
professional course makes use of and requires a knowledge 
of much general and cultural material; that every generalized 
course takes some cognizance of practical (though not neces- 
sarily financial) matters; and that every course, both 
generalized and specialized, be rooted in basic religious 
presuppositions and be concerned with moral and spiritual 
values. 

Translated into campus activities, this means that we 
should like to have a good balance of the cultural (including 
the social and the athletic), the professional, and the 
religious, and that each such activity be consciously planned 
so as to contribute in some way to our overall educational 
purpose. 

Translated into personnel, it means that we wish to have 
faculty and staff members who demonstrate in their personal 

62 



lives a devotion to this three-fold point of view: the liberal, 
the specialized, and the religious (with no narrow definition 
of any of these terms), and a degree of at-home-ness in each 
area. 

Following an announcement of the Ford Foundation program of 
grants in 1961 and the qualifying criteria to be applied, I wrote the 
following "editorial" in the October 11 issue of the Faculty Bul- 
letin: 

This announcement suggests to me that it is now time for us 
to take much more seriously what we have always done in a 
less organized way, that is, work on our objectives, our 
program, and our methods. I propose (1) that each depart- 
ment and school start at once to formulate as precisely as pos- 
sible a new statement of its own objectives. Let every faculty 
member have a part in this. Then submit the statement to the 
Dean's Council by December 1. 

(2) Immediately after December 1, let the Dean's Council 
work up a new statement of University objectives and submit 
this back to the faculty by January 5 for comment and refine- 
ment, and then prepare a revised statement by February 1 to 
submit to the members of the Board of Trustees. 

(3) After the Board has made whatever changes it desires 
and has acted on the revised statement at its February 13 
meeting, let the departments and schools now revise their 
own objectives wherever there seems to be any conflict 
between them and those adopted for the University as a 
whole. 

(4) Following this, let the curriculum as a whole and every 
individual course be judged in the light of departmental and 
University aims. If a course is not properly furthering these 
aims, it should obviously be revised or eliminated. 

As an example of quotations or reviews of statements by others, 
this was published in the October 14, 1959, issue: 

One of the good addresses I heard in Washington at the 
American Council on Education meeting was one by Dr. Lee 
A. DuBridge of Cal Tech. He made the point that a university 
is supposed to be a "center of learning," and that if the 
emphasis is placed on learning— learning on the part of the 
faculty as well as students — most of the other academic 
problems will solve themselves. 

I think there is a great deal of truth in this, and it strikes me 
that a pretty good question to ask ourselves when we are try- 
ing to decide on a course of university action is, "How much 
will it contribute to the learning process?" Let's ask it when 
we are working with the budget, when we are working on cur- 
riculum, when we are considering whether or not to ask for a 
leave of absence or to order a new piece of equipment. And 

63 



let's not divide this campus into two camps— the teachers and 
the learners — but consider ourselves all as learners. 

The "Liaison" Committee. At the second faculty meeting of my 
second year someone, on behalf of the local A.A.U.P. chapter 
made a motion that there be established a "liaison committee" to 
deal with misunderstandings or conflicts that might arise between 
the "faculty" and the "administration." I objected somewhat to 
this dichotomy because I preferred to regard all the professional 
staff as "faculty," most of whom were teaching-faculty, and all of 
whom had some administrative responsibility, whether for an 
individual class or for a department or a division or a school or for 
the over-all operation of the entire institution. But I granted, of 
course, that there was a power hierarchy, and that those at the bot- 
tom of the scale sometimes felt cut off from access to those at the 
head. So, I agreed to the idea of a liaison committee, for I could see 
it taking care of many in-house conflicts which often start as a 
small unfounded rumor or misinterpretation, and if not quickly 
dispelled can grow into something formidable. 

So we set up an ad hoc planning committee on October 12, 1959, 
and two months later this committee reported a plan by which the 
faculty could elect three professors, two associate professors, one 
assistant professor, and one instructor, and the president would 
appoint two "administrators," and this 9-member group (first 
elected November 18, 1959) would constitute the liaison commit- 
tee. Any faculty member could bring to it a complaint or suggestion 
or rumor, and if the committee itself could resolve the problem, 
well and good. If not, the committee would refer the matter to me 
or to some staff member who possibly could give an answer, or 
would bring it to the faculty meeting for clarification and whatever 
action was needed. 

I found this body to be quite helpful. It elected its own chairman, 
and this person would quite regularly come to me with some ques- 
tion or comment picked up at coffee break or elsewhere, enabling 
me to deal with incipient problems before they became serious. 

Faculty Benefits. The 1950s and 1960s were years in which 
faculty members, following the lead of the labor organizations, 
were organizing themselves to demand greater "benefits," more 
academic freedom, and more voice in making any decisions that 
affected their working conditions. I had been a member of the 
American Association of University Professors, and had, 
therefore, considerable sympathy with the teacher's point of view. 
I realized that the day of the paternalistic college president had 
pretty well disappeared by 1958, and was thus prepared, partly at 
least, to deal with the increasing requests, which tended to take 
the form of "demands" as a matter of right. 

Most of these demands for benefits had been dealt with to some 
extent by previous administrations. The policy of allowing full 
time faculty members on tenure to take a leave every seventh year 

64 



(sabbatical leaves), for example, had been accepted; some rules 
had been drawn up defining who was eligible to attend profes- 
sional conferences, and how much would be allowed toward 
expenses; a rather comprehensive insurance program had been 
put into effect, with the University paying a part of the premiums; 
the A.A.U.P. policy on academic freedom and tenure had been 
accepted; and the children of faculty members were allowed free 
tuition. 

These benefits were spelled out in a Faculty Handbook. We 
adopted the plan of making this a loose leaf publication, and of 
revising it one section at a time. One of the first things we added 
was the provision for the liaison committee. 

Another thing was an addition to the four conventional faculty 
ranks: professor, associate professor, assistant professor, and 
instructor. To these we added a fifth, that of distinguished profes- 
sor. The first to be awarded this rank were William T. Beadles, 
Emil Kauder, Samuel C. Ratcliffe, William Eben Schultz, and 
Wayne W. Wantland (April 1959). Later (1967) Lawrence Tucker 
was added to the list. 

By 1960 it appeared that the insurance coverage of faculty 
members needed some revision. A special faculty meeting was 
called on November 21, 1960, but nothing decisive was done until 
October 1962, when a special committee was appointed under the 
chairmanship of Edwin Carpenter of the speech department. This 
group sent out specifications to some 16 well-known insurance 
companies to ask for bids on three kinds of policies: group life, 
salary replacement (temporary disability), and major medical 
(hospitalization). The report and recommendations of this commit- 
tee were given to the faculty on May 6, 1963, and were accepted by 
the Board of Trustees on May 20 of that year. The group life policy 
was awarded to Ohio National; the major medical and disability 
contracts to New York Life. 

The practice of having faculty visitors to the Board of Trustees 
had been started in Dr. Holmes's administration. But in the spring 
of 1961 faculty visitors were first admitted to some of the commit- 
tee meetings of the Board, and at the same time certain student 
representatives were allowed to attend faculty meetings, at least 
on invitation. 

Illinois Wesleyan Credit Union. My experience with college 
teachers led me to conclude that most of them need some incentive 
to save money, and that many of them need also a convenient 
source from which to borrow occasionally. I found that several 
times a year I would get visits from teachers asking if they could 
get their paycheck a few days early in order to meet some 
emergency. (In my early days of teaching, I used to do that myself 
once in a while.) 

It seemed to me that the presence of a consumers' credit union 
within our staff would meet both these needs, and I asked Ed 
Carpenter early in 1965 to look into the requirements for getting a 

65 



C.U. started. He gave a preliminary report on April 11, 1966, 
indicating that a Federal credit union would meet our need very 
well, and on May 30, 1966, the IWU Federal credit union was 
organized. 

The original 10 members (membership fee: $0.25!) had by 1980 
increased to 200; the total assets from $2.50 to $150,000; and the 
loans from zero to a total of $439,500 during the 14 years, with only 
one default. I wish that everything we started during my decade 
could demonstrate comparable success! 

Honorary Degrees. The question as to how many honorary doc- 
torates a university should give is a troublesome one. To give too 
many cheapens the degree; to give too few alienates many people, 
and subjects the administration to many pressures. As I look back 
on the 1958-68 decade at IWU, I have the feeling that we gave 
somewhat too many (about 55 in the 10 years), although it would be 
very difficult to decide which ones should have been omitted. 

We tried to do a careful and responsible job in the selection 
process. During my first year, January 19, 1959, to be exact, I 
formed a joint faculty-trustee committee on honorary degrees. 
Even by that time I was receiving recommendations from various 
sources as to "worthy candidates." All these suggestions I kept in a 
folder, and would bring the folder to each meeting of the commit- 
tee, ordinarily twice a year. We considered each candidate in the 
file, together with others brought in by members of the committee, 
striving for a good mix of people of various fields, mostly IWU 
alumni who had distinguished themselves by serving worthy 
causes. 

Of all the degrees we gave, I think I derived most satisfaction 
from an honorary doctor of divinity degree which we awarded to a 
humble, much-beloved, rural church pastor. This man was nearing 
retirement, had always served small churches or circuits of 
churches, and had probably never earned more than the average 
salary of his peers. But I have a feeling that no one of the 55 we 
selected was more worthy than he. Certainly none was more sur- 
prised, nor more humbly grateful. 

Relations With Students. One of my first administrative acts was 
to call in the officers of the Student Senate and offer to give to the 
senate full authority to handle the student activity fee. Formerly, 
no very strict account had been kept of these fees because they 
simply went into the general revenue and were used to help pay 
the cost of extra-curricular activities, including, usually, a part of 
the library costs. When a student organization wanted some money 
from this fund to pay for an activity, they had to ask for it from the 
administration. But at my instigation, we separated out those items 
which were definitely student-activity-oriented — items such as 
their dances and other social affairs, the chapel services (with 
advice from the chaplain), most of the guest lectures, the student 
newspaper, the intramural athletic program, etc. We then asked 
the Student Senate to make out a budget each year for these 

66 




Meeting of the All-University Council, with Richard Allison '63, Student Senate president. 
at left of Dr. Bertholf 

authorized items, estimate how much this would amount to for 
each student, and give us this figure in time for us to put it into the 
next year's catalog as the student activity fee. The University 
would then take the responsibility of collecting this fee, would 
hold it for the senate, and would disburse it on order from the 
senate to pay budgeted items. 

This gesture of confidence paid off well. The students 
responded in a very responsible way, and thus one area of what 
had, in my previous experience, been a source of continual tension 
between students and administration, was suddenly eliminated. 

Another thing we did was to set up what we called "The All- 
University Council." This consisted of about half students (Stu- 
dent Senate officers, editor and business manager of the Argus, 
presidents of each class and of all the fraternities and sororities 
and other organized groups, etc.) and half faculty and staff (ad- 
ministrative officers, chaplain, director of athletics, advisers to all 
the organized groups, etc). It amounted to 40-50 persons. We met 
for dinner once a month (first on November 25, 1958), with the 
general idea of opening up lines of communication between 
administration and student leaders. I would frequently lead off 
the discussion with a description of some new project or policy, 
and would then field questions, either to me or one of my col- 
leagues, for as long as the group wanted to stay. No limits were 
placed on the subject matter of the questions. 

Increasingly, as students demonstrated their ability to take 
responsibility, we began to include them in all committees that 
dealt in any major way with student interest. Among the most 
important of these was the judiciary committee, which handled 



67 



infractions of rules of conduct, e.g., alleged cheating, stealing, con- 
sumption of alcohol or other drugs, and vandalism. Eventually, 
students comprised about half the membership of this committee. 
Other committees with student membership included admission, 
athletics, religious activities, convocations, and freshman orienta- 
tion. It was often noted in these committees when some hard deci- 
sion had to be made, that more often than not the vote was not the 
student block against the faculty block, but some from each 
group lined up against others from each. 

The selection of students for these committees was at first done 
by faculty members, but before long it was turned over to the Stu- 
dent Senate. Usually a note would go from my office to the presi- 
dent of the Student Senate giving a list of committees and the 
number of students authorized for each, and before long we would 
get a letter back naming the students the senate had selected. 

Next to the judiciary committee, probably the most active of 
these bodies was the religious activities committee, which later 
became the religious activities commission of the Student Senate, 
with the University chaplain as the only permanent faculty 
member. Its main job was to arrange for chapel services each 
Wednesday morning, and to plan and sponsor two lecture series 
each year, subsidized in part by the Immanuel Bible Foundation. 
A survey conducted by students in February, 1965, indicated that 
39 percent of the student body attended chapel regularly, and an 
additional 22 percent occasionally. 

Campus Unrest. This is a phrase often used to describe the grow- 
ing assertiveness of students during the 1960s and early 1970s. Stu- 
dents were determined to throw off the old "in loco parentis" 
restraints traditionally imposed on them by a paternalistic college 
administration, and to gain recognition as young aduits. The fact 
that this transition took place at Illinois Wesleyan with only a 
minimum of trauma is due mainly, I believe, to the fact that we 
had for several years been preparing for this change by giving stu- 
dents a significant voice in the decision-making campus commit- 
tees. 

The "White Paper" on University-Church Relations. In response 
to a request by some members of the Board of Trustees, I drew up 
in the fall of 1963 a statement which I called, "Illinois Wesleyan's 
Position as a Church-related University." We thought such a state- 
ment might be useful in informing prospective new faculty and 
administrative staff members as to just what the religious orienta- 
tion of Illinois Wesleyan is. We wanted on the one hand to 
separate ourselves from the outspoken "fundamentalist" colleges, 
but at the same time not to align ourselves with the purely secular 
institutions that assume no positive religious stance at all. 

If I had realized how difficult it would be to write a religious 
statement that would be widely understood in the way intended, I 
never would have attempted it. In my naivete I thought that in a 
couple of pages I could state a reasonable position that nearly 

68 



everybody would understand, and one that would be supported by 
perhaps 90 percent of the faculty. And I assumed that the student 
body would have no particular interest in the matter. Well, I was 
massively mistaken. 

Several faculty members that I thought would be my strongest 
supporters seemed to misunderstand completely what I intended 
to say. Others were openly hostile to the whole idea of trying to 
formulate Christian ideals for the institution. Others thought it 
would hinder rather than help our efforts to find good faculty per- 
sonnel. And when the statement was published in the Argus 
(where it was dubbed "The White Paper") it elicited more letters 
to the editor than any other issue in my administration, I believe — 
all of them critical. 

Actually, the paper never did become "official," i.e., it was 
never acted on by the Board of Trustees or its executive commit- 
tee. It really made no change in our faculty recruitment policy — I 
did not mean to imply that it would. I thought I was only stating a 
policy that was already in effect, and had been for many years. 

It is also interesting to note that two years later, when I made a 
few slight changes in the statement and had it published again in 
the Argus, it elicited not a single editorial comment nor any letters 
from either students or faculty. This probably does not indicate 
that the second statement was any more palatable than the first, 
but only that the Argus by that time had other issues to editorialize 
about. 

I present here the entire statement as it was revised on October 
26, 1965: 

ILLINOIS WESLEY AN'S POSITION AS A 
CHURCH-RELATED UNIVERSITY 

In order that prospective members of our faculty and 
administrative staff may understand, before they accept a 
position here, just what the religious orientation of Illinois 
Wesleyan University is, we have set forth below as clearly as 
we can what we conceive our attitudes to be as a Christian 
institution. 

It should be made clear, before proceeding further, that the 
criteria for tenure and for advancement at Illinois Wesleyan 
consist not merely in one's sympathy with these religious 
attitudes alone. There are also the criteria of professional 
competence and the assuming of professional responsibilities 
as a teacher and adviser, the demonstration of a spirit of 
cooperation with University personnel, and sympathy with 
the general purposes of the institution. But the desire of 
Illinois Wesleyan to include the religious along with the 
liberal and the professional in a "balanced, integrated, and 
continuous emphasis" on all three, means that the University 
can ill afford to have persons on its faculty or staff who are 
antagonistic to any one of these emphases. 

69 



Illinois Wesleyan is listed as a Methodist-related institu- 
tion, and it is proper to ask what this really means. The con- 
nection actually started at the beginning of the University's 
history in 1850, as evidenced by the selection of the name 
"Wesleyan" at that time and a formal declaration of spon- 
sorship by the Illinois Annual Conference of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church in September of that year. 

The charter of the University provided that there should 
be a Board of Trustees (now 36 members) and a Board of 
Visitors (now 12 members), the latter to consist entirely of 
ordained ministers of the Annual Conference. But trustees 
and visitors were to sit together as a joint board for the trans- 
action of all business with the one exception that the nomina- 
tion of a new president of the University was to be exclusive- 
ly a function of the visitors, and the voting on such a nomina- 
tion exclusively a function of the trustees. These provisions 
are still in effect. Trustees and visitors are elected to these 
posts by the Annual Conference, which gets nominations for 
all members of the joint board from the Conference Board of 
Education. The latter, in turn, usually relies on the joint 
board itself to make suggestions for these nominations. 

This relationship to what is now called the Central Illinois 
Conference of the Methodist Church has proved to be one of 
mutual benefit. In no way, except through the membership of 
individual Methodists on the joint board, does the Church 
exert any control or direction over the policies, curriculum, 
program, or personnel of the University. On the other hand, 
the support which the Methodist Church has rendered to the 
University in matters of public relations and finances has 
been most valuable down through the years. The University 
has in turn done much to serve the Church, since 40-50 per- 
cent of its student body quite regularly are members of this 
denomination, and since its facilities and personnel are 
extensively used on a voluntary basis by Church agencies and 
by local congregations. 

But the Church-college relationship is in reality not so 
much one in which each organization seeks to give help to the 
other, but is rather an expression of the Church's basic 
interest in higher education. It arises out of the conviction on 
the part of the Church that the youth of America should have 
the opportunity of going for their higher education not alone 
to secular colleges, but to colleges where the study of 
religious issues and concepts is included without apology in 
the curriculum of liberal education, and where every worthy 
vocation is regarded as a sacred vocation. 

Our responsibility as individual educators is not simply to 
teach subjects, but to enter into personal communication with 
our students as persons — each of infinite worth and each hav- 
ing unfathomed possibilities. Church-relatedness implies a 



70 



"religious" interest in each student and each colleague as a 
whole person, not merely a mind. 

Church-relatedness implies a dedicated devotion to the 
truth and an obligation to keep humbly searching for the 
truth, realizing that truth is always growing, never complete, 
and that no man ever has all the truth, even about his own 
special field or study. Moreover, after one has satisfied 
himself as to what is true, he still needs to deal with the ques- 
tion as to why it is true, and who the ultimate author of truth 
is. Every academic discipline, indeed every course, is taught 
from the "faith perspective" of the professor. It is, in our 
opinion, essential that most teachers in a Christian university 
teach from the perspective of the Judeo-Christian faith. 
Therefore, as a Christian university we are seeking to have a 
faculty that shares essentially the kind of faith — about the 
universe, and God, and man, and human history — that is 
expressed in the Bible, particularly the New Testament. "A 
university is a comradeship of faith." (Buttrick). 

A prospective member of the Illinois Wesleyan faculty or 
administrative staff should therefore ask himself or herself: 
"Can I warmly support such an attitude, and do I desire to 
contribute to the enhancement of such an atmosphere?" 

We assume that nearly everyone who answers the above 
questions in the affirmative will be an active member of 
some church. Most will belong to Protestant churches, but 
membership in a non-Protestant church will not disqualify a 
candidate. We are more interested in basic religious presup- 
positions and convictions than affiliation with any particular 
denomination. 

Neither do we attempt to prescribe any particular "school" 
of Christian theology or philosophy. Rather, we are anxious 
to stimulate both faculty members and students to engage in 
the sort of conversations on campus which bring into play a 
variety of theological points of view, thus challenging stu- 
dents to develop and defend their own positions. 

Anyone who can enter wholeheartedly into such an 
atmosphere has fulfilled one of the important requisites for 
permanent membership in the Illinois Wesleyan faculty. 

October 22, 1963 
Revised October 26, 1965 

The new issue in 1965 was civil rights. The fact that no social 
fraternity or sorority here at that time had a black member led 
most everyone to assume that each had a rule, either written or 
unwritten, against Negro members. When asked about it, the 
typical "Greek" answer tended to sound evasive — something to 
the effect that every campus society had the right to choose its 
initiates according to the wishes of its own members, and no one 
else. They staunchly defended their right to keep their member- 

71 



ship rules (or lack of rules) secret. 

But the Federal government was at this time requiring every 
applicant for Federal grants or loans to sign a statement of strict 
compliance with the 1964 Civil Rights Act. I willingly signed this 
statement and sent it in to Washington early in January of 1965, and 
told both the students and faculty what I had done. We were 
therefore on record that as an institution we did not practice racial 
discrimination in any form. 

Not long after this the Student Senate of Whitman College (Wal- 
la Walla, Washington) mailed out to a large number of church- 
related colleges a "declaration of intent" to "pursue actively" the 
practice of "integrating" all campus organizations. The Whitman 
Student Senate had signed this declaration, and they were asking 
the other student governments to sign it also "in accord with the 
spirit of the officially subscribed civil rights polity of the Univer- 
sity and, more importantly, on the basis of religious and 
democratic conviction." The IWU Student Senate approved this on 
December 17, 1965, by a vote of 32-14. 

By this time the faculty had likewise become much involved in 
the controversy through its human relations committee (which also 
had student members). This committee prepared a "human rights 
statement" of its own which it submitted to 46 local campus 
organizations in early February 1966, requesting their approval. 
Fourteen responded, 12 positively and 2 negatively. Several others 
were noncommital, asking for additional clarification. 

Accordingly, the statement was expanded and "clarified" and 
sent out again on February 18. This, however, elicited no more 
favorable response than the first one, in spite of a letter of my own, 
published on April 29, endorsing the statement, but refusing to 
require organizations to sign it for the same reason that I was not 
requiring faculty members to sign a loyalty oath. 

The next fall the human relations committee prepared still 
another statement. After passing it around among the faculty and 
collecting some 80 signatures, it was sent out about November 1, 
1966, for organizations to sign. The Student Senate on November 18 
voted confidence in the new statement by a small majority, but on 
December 9 reconsidered and rescinded its vote. The Greek 
societies took the attitude that this was a move on the part of these 
80 faculty members to close up fraternities and sororities at IWU. 
They insisted that the matter be referred to the Board of Trustees. 

At the February meeting of the Board that winter, the matter was 
considered by the committee on campus life. This committee was 
fairly well satisfied with the policy statement submitted by the 
Interfraternity Council, to the effect that "selectivity during rush 
is based on the personal merits of the rushee and on the standards 
set by each fraternity. The IFC at IWU prohibits discrimination on 
the basis of race," and recommended that the matter be further 
considered at the May meeting of the Board. 

By the time May 1967 had rolled around, the Pan-Hellenic Coun- 

72 



cil had also adopted the policy that "every girl asking to be rushed 
will be given an equal opportunity to be selected for 
membership," and the Board accepted this, along with the earlier 
IFC statement, as meeting the no-racial-discrimination policy of 
the University. 

This was not the end of the civil rights movement on college 
campuses, of course. But fortunately for me, the worst of the storm 
did not break until after I retired. I hope and believe, however, 
that our dealing with the matter in a forthright manner during my 
decade made it a little easier at IWU for my successor. 

Relations with Trustees. Some college presidents (to hear them 
talk) seem to fear their trustees; others [again, to hear them talk) 
seem to take great pride in their ability to manipulate their board. 
If I had either of these attitudes, I was not aware of it. My relations 
with the IWU Board of Trustees was almost always thoroughly 
pleasant and, I think, frank and honest. 

Since it is always the Board that chooses a new president, it was 
through the Board that I first had contact with Wesleyan. Back in 
1957 when the search for a successor to Dr. Holmes began, the 
University was operating under a charter which for exactly 100 
years had had a provision that in addition to the governing Board 
of Trustees there had to be also a Board of Official Visitors, 
elected by the Methodist Church through one or two of its Annual 
Conferences. These official visitors were always invited to meet 
with the trustees, where they had all the privileges of membership 
in the Board except the right to vote and to hold office. But the 
visitors had one exclusive privilege and duty, that of bringing in 
the sole nomination for a new president whenever a vacancy 
occurred in that office, the actual election being the exclusive 
privilege of the trustees. 

I have already described in Chapter 1 how the original contact 
was made with me through Dr. Raye Ragan, chairman of this 
official visitor search committee, and how favorably impressed I 
was by the trustees and official visitors I met on my first visit here. 
In Chapter 2 mention was made of my attempt during that first 
year to become better acquainted with the Board by having a per- 
sonal interview with each member in his office or place of 
business. This was probably the best thing I ever did by way of 
developing good relations with Board members. 

Each month I met with the executive committee, and three times 
a year with the entire Board. I tried not to use the Board or the 
executive committee as a "rubber stamp." My own opinions and 
recommendations, while not always well concealed, were 
nevertheless kept in the background until the Board members had 
had time to consider a question as objectively as possible. Besides, 
there were many questions about which my opinion was of little 
value. In those cases I simply had to rely on the expertise of 
members of my staff and of the Board. 
This was particularly true when it came to handling the business 

73 



details of building contracts, insurance, legal liability, special 
investments, and government reports and obligations. These were 
largely new to me, and had it not been for the good advice and help 
of businessmen, accountants, and lawyers on the Board, and 
expert staff members in our business office, I would have been 
greatly handicapped. But I was an avid learner, and shall ever be 
grateful for the education I derived from these experiences. 

One thing that impressed me most favorably about my Board 
was its willingness to go along with a bold building program. Only 
in a few cases was there hesitation. One of these was in regard to a 
new library. For a time a majority of the Board wanted to remodel 
and expand the old Buck Memorial Library, even in spite of the 
contrary advice of a visiting expert we employed to come in and 
survey our situation. But after a year or so of working on alternate 
plans, the dissenters were finally convinced that a new building 
was necessary, and everybody then got behind the new project. 

I found soon after arrival that we were not following closely the 
letter of the Board by-laws. So, in 1961 and again to a lesser extent 
in 1962, we revised them to make them correspond more closely 
with actual practice. It was a relatively simple process to make 
these changes, requiring only a two-thirds majority vote by those 
present at a regular meeting of the Board, provided a quorum was 
present. 

But the change most needed, we felt, was in the composition of 
the Board, e.g., in the status of the official visitors, the amount of 
alumni representation, the extent of control by the Church, and 
the geographical spread of the Board. Changes of this sort would 
require the amending of the charter, which in turn required a 
change on the state records in Springfield. Hence, at its May 21, 
1966 meeting, the Board, at my suggestion, appointed a committee 
consisting of William Goebel, O. B. Pace, Hugh Henning, Dale 
Pitcher, and me to work at the job of revising both the by-laws and 
the charter. This committee brought in its final report two years 
later (May 18, 1968) and it was adopted. 

The report recommended a reduction from 36 trustees plus 11 
official visitors to a total of 39 trustees (36 elected members and 3 
ex officio members) all with equal power. Nine of the 39 were to 
be elected by the Central Illinois Conference of the United 
Methodist Church, and one of the ex officio members was to be the 
presiding bishop of the U. M. Church in the area. Hence, the 
Church would be represented by 10 participating trustees (at least 
seven of whom must be ordained clergymen). Three of the 39 were 
to be selected by the Alumni Association. The remaining 24 were 
to be selected by the Board itself. 

Provision was made for an executive committee and four 
standing committees (instead of the six or seven previously), with 
each member of the Board assigned to one or another of the four: 
academic affairs, campus life, business affairs, and development. 
One member of the staff of the president of the University was 

74 



assigned as a resource person to each of these standing commit- 
tees: academic dean, dean of students, business manager, and 
director of development, respectively. 

These were the main changes. One important step remained to 
be accomplished: the approval of the amended charter and of the 
new by-laws by the Central Illinois Conference of the United 
Methodist Church. By these changes the Church was gaining more 
voting power in the decisions of the Board, but it was losing the 
power it had had in electing the Board. There were those in the 
Conference who saw in this an increased alienation of the Univer- 
sity from the Church, a thing which they deplored. On the other 
hand there were those who feared the possible liability which a 
court might assign to the Church in case someone sued the Univer- 
sity, and who welcomed, therefore, this limited involvement. On 
the whole, the proposed arrangement appealed to most members 
of the Conference as a good compromise, and the charter and by- 
law changes were approved by a substantial majority. 

Relations with Other Colleges. Inter-institutional relationships, 
particularly for the smaller colleges, are very important. By 
associating together, such colleges can usually gain favorable 
exposure, prestige, and mutual encouragement, and can often 
benefit greatly from sharing experiences. Illinois Wesleyan 
administrators had realized this long before I came, and had 
involved the University in many educational organizations. We 
had membership, for example, in the American Council on Educa- 
tion, the Association of American Colleges, the North Central 
Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, the Associated 
Colleges of Illinois, the Federation of Independent Illinois Col- 
leges and Universitites, and the National Association of Schools 
and Colleges of the United Methodist Church. Moreover, each of 
the professional schools and several of our academic departments 
had been accredited by and given membership in their respective 
professional organizations. 

But the 1950s and 1960s saw the rise of a new type of educational 
association, the consortium. This is a more intimate type of 
organization, involving usually a small group of similar institutions 
located close enough geographically so that they can easily join in 
such programs as shared library resources, exchange of students 
and professors, joint scheduling of visiting lecturers and artists, 
and cooperative study projects in this country or abroad. 

It was in the early 1960s that the idea of such a consortium 
among a few colleges here in the central states occurred to Presi- 
dent Paul McKay of Millikin University, Decatur, Illinois. He 
shared his thought with his Board of Trustees and was encouraged 
to approach several other college presidents to see what the 
interest might be. In general, he found a good response, and as a 
result the following nine colleges were invited to form the charter 
members of a group to be called The Central States College 
Association (CSCA): Augustana College, Carroll College, Gustavus 

75 



Adolphus College, Illinois Wesleyan University, Luther College, 
Manchester College, MacMurray College, Millikin University, and 
Simpson College. After all these had received approval from their 
respective Boards of Trustees, the consortium was incorporated in 
the State of Illinois and began its official existence on July 1, 1965. 
Within the next few years three additional institutions were 
added, bringing the number to twelve: Mundelein College, St. 
John's University, and Valparaiso University. 

A set of by-laws was drawn up providing that the Board of Direc- 
tors should consist of the presidents of the member colleges. Dr. 
McKay was elected first president of this Board, and President 
Ralph John of Simpson College, secretary. After considerable 
searching, the Board employed Dr. Pressley McCoy as its first 
executive, and located its office in Evanston, Illinois. 

As was hoped, the launching of the consortium triggered a flurry 
of activities. There arose almost at once a series of organized sub- 
groups, or sections: The academic deans, the deans of students, 
the business managers, the librarians, the teachers of chemistry, of 
education, of foreign languages, of philosophy, of physics, and of 
sociology, as well as the presidents of the several Student Govern- 
ment Organizations. An exchange of faculty lectures was arranged, 
mostly for one-week periods but in some cases for an entire 
semester. A program of institutional research was developed, sup- 
ported by a grant from the Carnegie Foundation. Opportunities 
were arranged for some students in elementary education in the 
more "rural" colleges to do observation and practice-teaching in 
the inner-city schools of Chicago. Science students, particularly in 
physics, were given opportunity to work at the Argonne National 
Laboratory near Chicago. Machinery was set up to allow library 
materials to go from one campus to another. 

Exchange exhibits of student art were arranged. Visiting lec- 
turers, sometimes from abroad, were brought in and scheduled for 
an entire semester, one week at each campus. Study trips to 
Europe and to various places in the U. S. were sponsored, 
especially in the January short term. There was also a project for 
testing the feasibility of teaching college-level introductory 
philosophy courses to selected seniors in high school. 

Several grants were obtained to help finance the projects, but 
for the most part they were supported by the $6,000 or so paid by 
each member college treasury each year. 

After three years of service to the consortium, Dr. McCoy 
resigned to accept a position in Redlands University, California. 
His decision was announced in May of 1968, just at the time I was 
preparing to retire from Illinois Wesleyan, with plans to spend the 
year 1968-69 in Korea as a consultant to the faculty of Ewha 
Womans University in Seoul. It happened that the "annual" 
meeting of the CSCA Board was being held that spring here on the 
Wesleyan campus, and the nominating committee put con- 
siderable pressure on me to take the position being vacated by Dr. 

76 



McCoy. So, after a brief consultation with Martha (and a hasty 
prayer for divine guidance), we decided to ask for a postponement 
of the invitation to Korea until 1969-70 and to spend 1968-69 with 
CSCA inEvanston. 

That was the way it was done, and both years turned out to be 
great experiences, for which Martha and I are both most grateful. 



By way of an historical footnote it should be added that I was succeeded 
in the executive position by Dr. Frank Gamelin, who had been dean of 
Augustana College, and the office was moved that fall (1969) to Rock 
Island. Dr. Gamelin served effectively for several years, but the 
enthusiasm for shared projects seemed to wane gradually, and on April 
12, 1977, the Board voted to dissolve the consortium, almost 12 years after 
its organization. 



11 



1 



SUMMARY 



Perhaps the single most comprehensive summary of the changes 
made at Illinois Wesleyan during the "Bertholf Years" is to be 
found in the final report which I gave to the Board of Trustees on 
May 18, 1968. 1 therefore present it in full below. 

A second farewell document, which I wrote for the Argus on 
May 24, 1968, contains some backward glances, but mostly some of 
my hopes and dreams for the future. 

Also in this issue of the Argus was an editorial by Editor Bob 
Sweet, which deals from a student point of view with some of the 
changes made. 

And finally, I am including two articles from the Pantagraph and 
one from the Argus. 

The rest is for others to record and evaluate. 

ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY 

Report of the President of the University 

May 18, 1968 

In this my last report to you I should like to summarize 
briefly the major changes made in the University facilities, 
assets and program during the past 10 years, and evaluate as 
best I can the educational heritage which I shall turn over to 
the able administration of Dr. Eckley, come next July 31. 

Let me start with the campus itself. During this decade we 
have purchased some 46 properties in the immediate vicinity 
here and have thereby enlarged the campus acreage from 
about 25.8 to about 33.8 acres, an increase of 31 percent, at a 
cost of nearly $650,000. 

During these 10 years there have been erected on the 
campus 10 entirely new buildings (four academic buildings, 
including the library, three residence halls, a field house, a 
bookstore, and a maintenance building); two additions have 
been made to Memorial Student Center and to the power 
plant; the old science building has been transformed into 
beautiful E. M. Stevenson Hall, and Westbrook Auditorium 
has been completely refurbished. Seven campus structures 
have been removed (four barracks, Old North, Duration Hall, 
and Spotlight Alley Theatre) along with at least 25 dwelling 
houses to make way for other structures. Most of the 
electrical power lines have been placed underground. The 
amount spent on these various building operations is roughly 
$8,500,000. 

Enrollment has increased about 35 percent, from 1,148 
equivalent full time students in the fall of 1957 to 1,554 in the 
fall of 1967. Within this total number the biggest increase has 

78 



been in nursing; this school, which was not in existence until 
the fall of 1958, now has 172 students. The School of Drama 
has also had a spectacular growth; in the fall of 1959 when it 
was separated from the department of speech there were 
only five students in the junior and senior years majoring in 
drama, while this year there are 36 in these same two years. 

The net total financial assets of the University have grown 
from approximately $6.5 million in 1957 to $14.5 million in 
1967. Of this latter, the endowment funds amount to nearly 
$5,000,000 (book value) and the annuity and trust funds to 
something over $2,000,000. 

The educational and general expenditures have tripled 
during this period, which makes the per-student increase 
about 127 percent. The average annual faculty compensation 
has slightly more than doubled. Library holdings have almost 
doubled from about 55,000 volumes to nearly 100,000. 

If you think you detect a note of pride in my reciting of 
these statistics, you are doubtless correct. But the pride is not 
simply personal pride — rather it is the feeling I share with all 
of you on the Board, and with the entire Illinois Wesleyan 
family: faculty, administrators, present students and alumni, 
and even with the citizens of the community. For each of 
these groups has shared in the work and in its support, and 
has a right to share in the pride. 

But the advances of the University in this decade are cer- 
tainly not to be measured alone in terms of such statistics as 
those just given. Rather it is in terms of the use made of these 
fine new facilities by an increasingly able group of students 
and faculty, that our success should be measured. What 
changes in educational program have taken place? 

Stated chronologically, the first major change was the deci- 
sion to establish a collegiate School of Nursing. This school 
began operating on a small scale in the fall of 1958, and came 
under its present leadership in the fall of 1960. Since then it 
has gone from one success to another, until it has achieved a 
national reputation. With the completion of the lower floor of 
E. M. Stevenson Hall within, we hope, the next couple of 
years, it will have the facilities, the faculty, and the program 
to accommodate some 225 candidates for the B.S.N, degree. 

I have already mentioned the growth of the School of 
Drama since 1959, and particularly since 1963 when the new 
McPherson Hall came into use. Another decision of a similar 
kind, made in 1967, was to organize our work in economics 
and business into a division of the College of Liberal Arts. 
This has operated for the current year under the chair- 
manship of Dr. W. T. Beadles, and will continue with an 
enlarged staff and expanded curriculum next year under the 
new chairman, Dr. Harrington, as Dr. Beadles retires. We 
anticipate a marked growth in this division. 



79 



Another significant curricular change occurred in 1962 
when the department of psychology was moved from the divi- 
sion of social science to the division of natural science and 
given a mandate to "go experimental." This has resulted in a 
surge of interest in the field, and a marked increase in the 
number of majors. 

Great improvement has also been made in the facilities, 
equipment, and faculty for the other sciences. Biology has 
adopted an entirely new curriculum. Mathematics has had a 
spectacular growth in the past two years. Physics is picking 
up fast. 

Foreign languages is another field in which great improve- 
ment has been made. The language laboratory has been 
modernized with the latest equipment and is being used con- 
stantly. Mention should also be made of the new 
anthropology emphasis which has been added to sociology, 
and of the fact that political science a few years ago was 
separated from history and placed in a separate department. 

But the change that has probably had greatest effect on the 
entire program is the inauguration of the January Short 
Term. The stimulus which this has given to independent 
study, to new methods of teaching, and to off-campus learn- 
ing experiences has been tremendous. And so far we have 
seen only the beginning. 

We are finding also that many students do very well with 
"independent study" courses administered during the sum- 
mer. This is in part a reflection of the high caliber of students 
which the University now attracts and in part of the ability of 
many of our teachers to so motivate students that they 
become self-propelled and take an adult attitude toward 
learning. 

Our new ACE (Academic Challenge Electives) plan is also 
proving useful in broadening the liberal arts base of many 
students. In this, any upperclass student in good standing may 
take one ACE course each semester for four semesters in 
some field outside his major without fear of having his class 
standing lowered by a low grade, since no grade is given 
except "Credit" or "No Credit." 

The faculty has devoted much time this year to a revision 
of the curricular requirements for the bachelor of arts and 
the bachelor of science degrees. Students are becoming 
increasingly involved along with the faculty in working out 
these changes. This is as it should be. College-age students 
are becoming more and more "adult" in their point of view. It 
will probably not be long before 19-year-olds or even 18-year- 
olds will be given the right to vote and all other legal rights as 
an adult citizen. This will result, I'm sure, in even more flexi- 
bility in the curriculum, less rigidity in class attendance 
requirements and in campus rules generally, and perhaps 



80 



some different way of indicating academic success other than 
grades. 

We are, like most other colleges, making constantly 
increased use of the computer. Our grades are now fairly 
completely computerized, and the payroll and other business 
operations soon will be. Some progress is being made to make 
computer service available to students and faculty in the 
sciences and mathematics and also in business administra- 
tion. We are much indebted to the Funk Brothers Seed Com- 
pany for making available to us at a very favorable rate the 
use of their computer at certain hours. 

As I prepare to relinquish the presidency, my main feeling 
is one of deep gratitude to you on the Board of Trustees for 
your truly wonderful support and friendship through these 10 
years. To the two presidents under whom I have served, Ned 
Dolan and Paul Allison, I owe more than I can say. Every 
major advance here has come about only because in each 
case they got behind the idea and supported it. Oftentimes 
they have had more faith, more daring than I have had. It has 
been amazing how many times we of the administration have 
gone to the Board or to the executive committee with an idea 
which we thought might be too expensive or too risky, only to 
find that you were entirely willing to take the plunge. 

All during these 10 years we have worked under an archaic 
set of by-laws. Sometimes we have actually ignored them. 
The status of the official visitors, for example, has never been 
clear. Yet in spite of this, because of good common sense and 
willingness to work together, we have accomplished our 
business and through the efforts of Bill Goebel and you other 
attorneys we have kept our acts reasonably legal. 

Now, however, we have a new set of by-laws to present to 
you which, we believe, will greatly simplify and regularize 
our procedures, and I hope you will adopt them. If so, I shall 
turn over this job to Dr. Eckley with much satisfaction, confi- 
dent that the University is still Church-related in the finest 
sense, but legally somewhat freer than formerly to follow the 
policies worked out by its Board. 

Personally, I am convinced that the religious purpose of 
Wesleyan continues to be just as important as either its 
liberal or its vocational purpose. You have chosen again to 
place in the hands of a lay churchman the administrative 
responsibility for keeping this emphasis balanced and at high 
quality. I have every confidence in his desire and ability to do 
this. The past, I am sure, is only prologue to a still greater 
future. 

Respectfully submitted 

Lloyd M. Bertholf 
President 



81 



THE ECHO CHAMBER 

"Ifs" to Challenge IWU's Potential 
byDr.LloydM.Bertholf 
President of IWU 
Henry Brooks Adams once wrote (I'm sorry to relate) that 
"nothing is more tiresome than a superannuated pedagogue." 
If that is your own conclusion, here would be a good place 
to stop reading. But if you're interested in a few conclusions 
of a soon-to-become superannuated pedagogue, read on. 

1. As to the nature and purpose of education. 

I agree with Dr. Christian Gauss that the purpose of educa- 
tion "is to open the mind, not to fill it. . . . Education does not 
exist in and for itself. It is not a good thing as such. 

"It is only an instrument, a tool, which may be used for 
good or evil. The aim is to use it as a tool for good." He's 
implying what has been pointed out many times — that an 
educated rascal is more to be feared than an ignorant rascal. 

Unless an educational institution seeks, therefore, to 
promote the development of character, it may simply be con- 
tributing to the sophistication of rascality. For as George Ber- 
nard Shaw once said, "The most tragic thing in the world is a 
man of genius who is not also a man of character." 

I believe that good education must concern itself with the 
whole man, not just his mind. Since "education" here really 
means "educators," it follows that those who would be good 
educators (both teachers and administrators) must be con- 
cerned with their students as whole persons — as younger 
brothers and sisters, shall we say — having unfathomed pos- 
sibilities. 

The art of teaching is not in telling, but rather in 
suggesting — "redemptive questioning," as someone has said. 

2. As to the future of the smaller liberal arts institutions 
such as Illinois Wesleyan. 

These colleges and small universities have continued up to 
this time because they have filled a need. Now, many of the 
large public universities which have heretofore been 
specialized institutions are paying liberal arts colleges the 
supreme compliment of imitating them. 

They are adopting the liberal arts curriculum (often even 
including courses in religion), giving the same degrees and 
breaking up the campus into small units or "colleges" so as to 
achieve the advantages of smallness. 

But this only goes to show that the need still exists. And 
because of our small size and great flexibility we can con- 
tinue to lead in all sorts of educational experimentation and 
innovation. 

If a small university can attain (or maintain) a high quality 
of inspirational teaching; 



82 



if it can demonstrate a real interest in the whole life of all 
its students without being paternalistic or over-protective; 

if it can attain a "community" of campus life where two- 
way communication is easy and effective and where every 
segment of the community is involved in helping every other 
segment; 

if it can offer a satisfactory variety of curricula; 

if it can stimulate students to develop rapidly their inde- 
pendence of thought, their self-evaluation, self-motivation 
and self-discipline; 

if by the proper selection of staff and program it can induce 
students to adopt high ideals of service and character; 

and if it can do all this within the ability of each student to 
pay; then I foresee a long and glorious life for such an institu- 
tion. 

There are many "ifs" in the above paragraphs but I believe 
Illinois Wesleyan has the potential to meet all the conditions. 
It will require much in the way of private support by gifts 
from its alumni and other friends. But the result will be more 
than worth the price. 

No one who has attended IWU in the past 10 years has 
derived more benefit from the experience here than have my 
wife and I, and we are deeply grateful. We shall continue to 
hold a deep personal interest in every student and every staff 
member with whom we have worked. 

Blessings on each of you. 

—ARGUS, May 24, 1968 



* * * * * 



FROM THE EDITOR'S DESK 

The Bertholf Years — decade of innovation 

In 10 years at Illinois Wesleyan University, Dr. Lloyd M. 
Bertholf has left an impression on the campus that will 
remain long after his last day in office. 

He is a man who had the foresight and interest in 1957 to 
accept the challenge of the presidency of this University and 
then to push for its further development. 

Not long after assuming office, Dr. Bertholf took the first 
step toward greater student responsibility by turning over to 
the senate a portion of the new student activity fee. 

Dr. Bertholf believed the students would manage these 
funds well, and, throughout the years, this trust has not been 
broken. It is to his credit that this move has been so well 
accepted. 

There were other areas of the University that needed atten- 
tion, especially facilities and buildings. Dr. Bertholf 
instituted the 12th Decade Advance to improve these physical 
properties. 



83 



Holmes Hall, Fred Young Fieldhouse, McPherson Theatre, 
Sherff Hall of Science, Ferguson Hall, Munsell Hall, the 
heating plant, two additions to the Memorial Student Center 
and the library are all part of the Advance. 

These were facilities that the University desperately 
needed when Dr. Bertholf became president. They were, 
therefore, high on his priority list. As each was finished, the 
way lay open for another to be started. 

Innovation has been a key in Dr. Bertholf's administration. 
The most important aspect of this is the short term-long term 
plan initiated in 1965. 

Short term has been invaluable to students wishing to delve 
deeply into a subject for three weeks or to travel across the 
world in search of knowledge. 

Such a new, versatile system has all avenues of utilization 
open to it. Thanks to the foresight of a president, Illinois 
Wesleyan has the opportunity to make use of this system. 

Dr. Bertholf can be credited with other innovations during 
his 10 years here. When Central States College Association 
was formed, IWU was among the charter members. 

A summer independent study program was set up. 
Freshmen orientation sessions were held on summer 
weekends for the first time. 

Although a college president is always busy, IWU's 
executive always has an "open door" for students. He is will- 
ing to take time from his duties to talk with a student or to 
confer with a campus leader. 

This list of "achievements" could go on and on. The point of 
it all is that IWU owes Dr. Lloyd M. Bertholf a deep debt of 
gratitude for the thought and planning that went into his 
proposals. 

—ARGUS, May 24, 1968 
Editor, Bob Sweet 

***** 



BERTHOLF LEAVES MARK 

It would seem to us that Dr. Lloyd M. Bertholf can step out 
as Wesleyan's president without too many nagging doubts 
about the results he will leave behind. 

The rise in quality of education at IWU in the last decade, 
alluded to by both President Bertholf and Board President 
Paul Allison, is obvious to faculty, trustees, and those close to 
the University. 

The University has not exploded in size, but has shown a 
controlled growth suitable to the gains in financial security, 
faculty improvement and building progress. 

The ratio of faculty to students has risen; the level of train- 
ing of the faculty has risen, too. Dr. Bertholf, in addition, has 



84 




Change of command: Retiring President Lloyd M. Bertholf turns over keys of the University 
to incoming president. Dr. Robert S. Eckley, in 1968. 

been able to obtain a broad spectrum of experts who have 
served as part-time faculty members. 

Dr. Bertholf's commitment to private education and 
Wesleyan's successes during his tenure have played a part, at 
least, in gaining greater attention from a larger audience for 
the continued strengthening of non-tax supported institutions 
of higher learning. 

Private universities such as Wesleyan can better argue for 
greater state scholarship expenditures and expanded support 
from individual and corporate sources if they can point to 
expert, trained, interested administrators and imaginative 
trustees. 



85 



This Wesleyan has been able to do with no little success 
during the last decade. 

Credit for Wesleyan's stability and quality cannot be 
limited to the president's office alone, but Dr. Bertholf has 
been the right man, in the right places, at the right time. 

—PANTAGRAPH, Editorial 
February 22, 1967 

***** 

BERTHOLF DECADE TIME OF PROGRESS FOR IWU 
by Dick Swoboda 

"We must have not only educated men, but dedicated men 
with character — responsible, dedicated and unselfish." 

So said Dr. Lloyd M. Bertholf in September, 1958, shortly 
after becoming president of Illinois Wesleyan University. 

When the retiring president of IWU spoke these words 10 
years ago he was attempting to define the type of men and 
women he hoped the University would graduate under his 
tenure. 

But the words also apply to Mr. Bertholf, too. His associates 
at the University and throughout the community learned. 

What has happened to the University under such a man? 

Numerous Gains. Enrollment is up, new buildings have 
replaced crumbling edifices, a school for nurses has been 
established, financial aid has increased, a revolutionary 
Short Term experiment has flourished and curriculum has 
been updated. 

Mr. Bertholf is particularly proud of the development of 
the University's nursing program. It started in 1958 without 
sufficient leadership and without a building. 

Today it is probably the fastest growing branch of the 
University, has a renovated building to work in and the full 
cooperation of Brokaw Hospital. 

President Bertholf believes that the January Short Term 
installed under his reign has allowed both teachers and stu- 
dents more academic freedom. This is high on his list of 
accomplishments. 

"By this program, we try to give the teacher an opportunity 
to innovate and the student a chance to express himself," the 
president said. 

Curiosity Leads. Some students have spent the Short Term 
in travel while others have taken courses they have wanted to 
take, but just didn't have the time. 

"They've been to California to study the gold rush and 
they've been to the Dakotas to study Sioux Indian culture," 
the Kansas native said. 

"In other words, we let their curiosity take them wherever 
it will." 



86 



Being a member of the Central States College Association 
also lets students go to another campus to study courses not 
offered at IWU, he pointed out. 

"There has been a decided change in the physical 
appearance of the campus since I first arrived in 1958," Mr. 
Bertholf said. 

He pointed out there were four Army barracks serving the 
campus, one of which stood where the present-day 
administration building is. "All those went down," Mr. 
Bertholf said. 

Building Projects. Since his appearance there have been 
about 15 major building projects. 

They include an administration building, a science hall, a 
field house, an addition to the student center, two dormitory 
facilities, renovation of Stevenson Hall for the school of nurs- 
ing, a new maintenance building, a bookstore, athletic 
dormitory, partial renovation of Presser Hall and a just- 
completed library. 

The University also spent about $90,000 dollars putting 
electrical wiring underground. 

The building program will go on after President Bertholf 
leaves, but some of the drawing board ideas were instigated 
by him. 

Others to Come. "There is a $2V2 million fine arts complex 
on the drawing boards and we've practically got the construc- 
tion of an observatory to the bidding stage," he said. 

Also, a $1 million grant has been approved for the building 
of a new dormitory behind Magill and Franklin Halls. 

Tentative plans also call for a new art building west of 
McPherson Theatre. A residence for the president has 
received the go-ahead signal. 

Mr. Bertholf will leave IWU August 1 and will become 
president of the Central States College Association in 
September. 

He will succeed Dr. Pressley C. McCoy, CSCA head since 
1965. 

The Bertholfs will live in Evanston, site of the CSCA head- 
quarters. 

—PANTAGRAPH, July 14, 1968 



BERTHOLF DIRECTS YEARS OF GROWTH 

by Beth Davis 

Assistant Editor 

When President Lloyd M. Bertholf came to Illinois 

Wesleyan Aug. 1, 1958, average compensation for faculty was 

$5,500 per year, and the enrollment was 1,000. 



87 



He then expressed hopes for expansion to 1,500 students 
and "astronomical" annual compensation of $10,000 for 
faculty by 1970. 

TODAY enrollment is 1,500, but projections run up to 2,200. 
Average compensation is $10,741 today, and must continue to 
rise, said Dr. Bertholf, to remain not only competitive with 
other schools, but above the national average so as to attract 
good professors. 

Dr. Bertholf came to IWU from a deanship at the College 
(now University) of the Pacific in Stockton, Calif. 

"I found here a pretty good program, I thought, but not as 
many PhD's or as much expertise as it seemed to me we ought 
to have." 

THERE WERE a number of deficiencies in the facilities, 
too. A converted carriage house named "Spotlight Alley" 
Theatre seated 100 in a squeeze. Offices were then in Dura- 
tion Hall, which until last year sprawled in the middle of the 
quad. Ground was broken for Holmes Hall on the day of his 
inauguration in February, 1959. 

"I TURNED my attention to getting the money to get the 
faculty for a better academic program," said the president. 
He also began to emphasize "getting students involved in the 
whole operation of the university — expanding the student 
membership on faculty committees." 

Dr. Bertholf pointed out that the president is "the symbol of 
the institution," and his main purpose is to give the whole 
spectrum of people — students, faculty, administrators, 
trustees, community, etc. — "confidence in the institution." 

OF DR. ECKLEY, he told alumni: "It is providential, I firm- 
ly believe, that the nominating committee has been able to 
find such a competent and dedicated Christian gentleman as 
they have, to nominate as my successor ... I commend him to 
you wholeheartedly and will turn over my duties to him, 
come next July 31, with complete confidence 

Dr. Bertholf said that "his job will be similar to what I 
faced," but that today the emphasis is on "out-of-class 
experience" as well as on improved instruction. 

ONE OF Dr. Bertholf's dreams, a university chapel, is 
among the unfinished business he leaves. He considers a 
chapel an important symbol of purpose and a focal point on a 
church-related campus. 

He listed a science lecture room and an art school building 
as other unfulfilled plans. 

Why did he accept the presidency? Although he received 
invitations from other colleges, he said, "I fought it off for 10 
or 15 years. But one's influence and ability to make an impact 
on the academic program is greater in the president's chair." 

—Argus, February 13, 1968 



88 



89 



INDEX 



Acacia Fraternity 37 

Academic Challenge 

Electives 51-52,80 

Adams Hall 37 

Admissions Committee 68 

Administration Building: 

Ground breaking. ...12, 17, 23 

Completion 23 

Dedication 24 

Alexander, John 54 

Allen, Eleanor 54 

All-University Council ... 11, 67 

Alsene, Ed 54 

A.A.U.P 64 

Andrew, Bunyan 9, 22 

Anthropology, Instruction 

in 47 

Argus 49, 67, 69, 78, 83, 84, 88 

Arnold, Velma 8 

Ascareggi, James 53 

Associated Colleges of 

Illinois 18 

Astronomy, Instruction in ....52 
Astrophysics, Instruction 

in 52 

Athletics 7,8 

Athletics Committee 68 

Austin, Joseph 53 

Bachelor of Arts degree, 

foreign language 

requirement 52 

Bachelor of Science degree, 

limited to six majors 52 

Bankert, Robert 53 

Barbour, James 54 

Beadles, William T 5, 22, 48, 

49, 65, 79 

Bergstrom, John 53 

Bertholf, Martha 2, 4, 31, 54 

Beutner, Harvey 53 

Bone, Robert 57 

Bookstore, University 8, 30 

Bouwman, Clark 9 

Brandon, Susan 54 

Braught, David 53 

Brian, Fred 9 

Bridges, Dennis 54 



Brokaw Hospital 8, 44, 45 

Brown, Donald 54 

Browns, Ralph 9 

Brucker, Roger 54 

B.S. in Nursing degree 44 

Buchholz, Mildred 6 

Buck Library 23, 37, 41, 74 

Buildings: goal 10, 11 

Graph of building 

activity 43 

Existing in 1958 23 

Built during decade 78 

Removed during decade ...78 

Burt, John 54 

Bushnell, Paul 53 

Business and Economics 

Division 48 

Business, Instruction in 48 

By-laws, Board of 

Trustees 74-75 

Campbell, Ronald 54 

Campus Life, Trustee 

committee on 74 

Campus size 23, 78 

Campus unrest 68 

Carpenter, Edwin 9, 65 

Carpenter, Kenneth 26 

Case, Harold 12 

Cello player story 

(footnote) 3 

Central Illinois Conference, 

U.M. Church 41, 70, 74, 75 

Central States College 

Association 75-77 

Century Club 21,22 

Chance, Varner 9 

Chapel services, 

Why have? 61 

Charles, Henry 9 

Chau, YauPik 53 

Christmas carol sing 11, 12 

Civil rights 71-73 

Church relations 69-71 

Church, Roy 20 

Cloud, Elizabeth 54 

College Conference of Illinois 

& Wisconsin 41 



90 



College Credit in 

Escrow 50-51 

College of Fine Arts 9 

College of the Pacific 1, 2 

Collins, Joseph 53 

Colter, Larry 54 

Committees of the Board of 

Trustees 74 

Computers 81 

Conference Office 

Building 41,42 

Convocations Committee 68 

Craycraft, Nona 9 

Credit Union 65, 66 

Dads' Association 22 

Darlington, W. W 53 

Davidson Room 35 

Davidson, William J 27, 28 

Dietz, Patricia 9 

Detweiler, Herman 54 

Diener, Tom 54 

Dickinson, John 38 

Distinguished Professor 

rank 65 

Divided Semester Plan .... 49-51 

Doctorates in the Faculty 11 

Dodds, Glenn 54 

Dolan, Ned 2,16,26 

Donalson, Robert 53 

Drake, Bernadine 54 

Drama, Instruction in 47, 48 

Drama, School of 48 

Drexler, Dwight 9, 22 

DuBridge, Lee A 63 

"Dug Out" 35 

"Duration Hall" 4, 23, 27, 

31-33, 36 

Eckerd College 49 

Eckley, Robert 78, 81 

Economics (see Business & 

Economics) 

Eddy,Don 54 

Educational Psychology 47 

Elm trees on the campus 11 

Endowment Fund 

[footnote) 20 

Endowment Fund goal 10 

Enrollment 20, 78 

Erickson, Ruth 9 



Evans, Mr. and Mrs. Mark. ...40 
Evans, Orme 38, 40 

Faculty benefits 64, 65 

Faculty Bulletin 60, 63 

Faculty-Church Relations 

Dinner 16 

Faculty Handbook 65 

Faculty insurance program ..69 

Faculty retreats 57, 58 

Faculty salaries 20 

Faculty Visitors to the 

Board 65 

Far-Eastern Culture, 

courses in 52 

Faust, John 54 

Ferguson, Constance 9, 36 

Ferguson Hall 36 

Ferguson, Rodney 38 

Ferguson, Wilbert 36 

Ficca, John 9 

Financial assets, 

1957 and 1967 79 

Foreign Language 

instruction 80 

Foster, Helen 54 

Frank, Forrest 53 

Franzen, Dorothea 9, 22 

Fraternities and 

Sororities 71-73 

Fraternity and Sorority 

Houses 36,37 

Fred Young Field 

House 27,41 

Freshman Orientation 

Committee 68 

Fristoe, Dewey 9 

Future of small liberal arts 

institutions 82 

Gamelin, Frank 77 

Gardner, Greg 53 

Gauss, Christian 82 

Goals for the University 

(1958) 10 

Goebel, William 74,81 

Gordon, Jane 54 

Graduate work 52, 53 

By correspondence 52 

In Music 52 



91 



In Science 52, 53 

Griffin, Margaret 44, 45 

Gross, John O. (footnote) 1 

Harrington, Robert 53 

Hartranft, Annabelle 54 

Hedding Hall (footnote) 4 

Henning, Hugh 74 

Herren, Helen 54 

Hess, Wendell 53 

Hessert, Norman 53 

Hessert, Paul 9 

Heyboer, Paul 54 

Hilton, Alberta 54 

Hishman, Richard 54 

Holm, Lydia 53 

Holmes, Frank 9 

Holmes Hall 23,24 

Holmes, Merrill J 1, 3, 4, 12, 

15,17,23,24 

Honorary degrees 66 

Horenberger, Jack 7, 8 

Hughes, David 54 

Husted, Virginia 9 

Illinois Power Company 42 

Illinois State Normal 

University 57 

Illinois State Scholarships.. ..21 
Immanuel Bible 

Foundation 68 

Inauguration, 1959 12 

Indebtedness of the 

University 20 

Independent Study 

courses 51, 80 

"In loco parentis" 68 

Insurance, Instruction 

in 48,49 

Interfraternity Council 72 

International Tree of 

Learning 12-15 

January Short Term ....49-50, 80 

Jimison, Carmin 54 

Journalism, Instruction in ....52 
Judiciary Committee 67 

Kappa Delta 37 

Kappa Kappa Gamma 37 

Kasch, Philip W 5 

92 



Kauder, Emil 9 

Keck, Robert 8 

Kelley, Joseph 7 

Kennedy, Dorothy 54 

Kessler, Gary 54 

Kilgore, Rupert 9, 22 

King, John 54 

Kingland, Marjorie 53 

Klauser, Lucile 9, 53 

Kresge Foundation 16, 40 

Krieger, Ruth 9 

Kulfinski, Frank 53 

Labarthe, Pedro 9, 13-14 

Larson, Don 8-9 

Larson, Mary 54 

Language laboratory 15 

Leonard, Richard 9 

Liaison Committee 64 

Library, Buck 38 

Library, New 37-39 

Lowry, Robert 58 

Luerssen, Oliver 9 

Lugg, Thomas 2 

Lyle, Guy 37 

Maintenance Building.... 40, 41 

Mancinelli, Mario 9 

Master of Music degree 52 

Master of Music 

Education degree 52 

McCord, Lillian 9 

McCoy, Pressley 76, 77, 87 

McCullough, Edward 53 

McDonald, William 53 

McGrosso, John 53 

McKay, Paul 75,76 

McNeil, Barton 53 

McPhersonHall 

(Theatre) 24-25 

Meierhofer, Anne 6, 21 

Memorial Student 

Center 34-35 

Merritt, Charles 22 

Methodist Youth 

(Student) Day 11,16 

Meyers, Doris 9 

Meyers, Joseph 9 

Michel, Dieter 53 

Miller, Emerson 53 



Miller, Paul 54 

Moody, Milton 54 

Morale 61-62 

Mower, A. Glenn 9 

Mowry, Robert 53 

MunsellHall 8,36 

National Defense Loan 

Fund 21 

National Science 

Foundation 16, 53 

Navy V-l.V-5, and V-7 

programs 8 

Neumeyer, Carl 9 

Newcomb, Zela 9 

Nichelson, Lynn 21, 54 

Niehaus, Marian 9 

North Central Association 2 

North Hall 33-34, 38, 47 

Nott, David 53 

Nursing, School of 44-46, 79 

Baccalaureate degree 

concept 45 

Building 34 

Objectives of the 

University 62-63 

Oborn, Daniel 54 

Oborn, George T 5, 13, 

21,31 
Observatory, 

Astronomical 39-40 

Official Visitors, 

Board of 73,74,81 

Ogden, Wilbur 9 

Oggel, Elizabeth 9, 22 

Olsen, Roger 54 

Oratory 47 

Pace, O.B 74 

Pan-Hellenic Council 72 

The Pantograph 57, 78, 86, 87 

Pape, Max 54 

Pearson, Justus 53 

Peppard, Joan 53 

Pfeltz, Clifford 53 

Pflederer, Mildred 54 

Phi Gamma Delta 36 

Physical plant, Value of 20 

Pitcher,Dale 74 

Plum, Abram 53 



Polites, George 53 

Power plant 40 

Pre-engineering program 52 

President't Club 22 

President's home 17, 23 

Presser Foundation 31 

Psychology, Instruction 

in 46-47,80 

Public speaking 47-48 

Purdue University 1 

Purpose of the 

University 58-59 

Ragan, Raye 1, 2, 73 

Ratcliffe, Samuel 9, 65 

Reid, Donald 54 

Reid, Patricia 54 

Religious Activities 

Committee 68 

"Retailer for a Day" 

program 16 

Ridenour, James 54 

Robinson, Marie 9, 22, 48 

Ross, Paul 9 

Ruoti, James 54 

Ruthenberg, Donald 54 

Sandstrom, Ronald 53 

Schultz, June 9 

Schultz, William Eben 9 

Scifres, Sammy 54 

Shanks, Mary 45, 54 

Shaw, William E 1 

Sheean, Jack (footnote) 39 

Sheean Library 52 

Sherff, EarlE 27,30 

Sherff Science Hall 26, 37 

Shiers, Chester 9 

Short, Lee W 6-7, 11, 22, 50 

Sigma Chi 38 

Silber, John 9 

Size of the student body, 

proj 30 

Smiley, Mary 9 

Smith, Edgar M 20 

Smith, John Sylvester 5 

Social Work, Instruction in. ..47 

Sociology, Instruction in 47 

Special Investment 

Fund 18-19 



93 



Speech; School of 

Speech 47-48 

State Farm Insurance 

Company 49 

Stegner, Richard 54 

Stone, Jerry 54 

Story, G.L 54 

Strand, Donald 53 

Student Activity fee 11 

Student Loan Fund 20 

Student Senate 68-72 

Students on Committees 68 

Summer Independent 

Study 51 

Summer Science Institute ....16 
Swigart, V.C.; Swigart 

Memorial Organ 16, 31 

Tau Kappa Epsilon 36-37 

Thibodeaux, Carole 53 

Thompson, Frank 53 

Thompson, Harold 54 

Thompson, Loyal 13 

Thrall, Charles 9 

Tippett, Donald 12 

Track, athletic field 41 

Troxel, Russell 8 

Trustees, Board of: 

In 1958 16 

And School of Nursing 46 

Committees of 74 

Relations with 73-74 

Tucker, Lawrence 9, 65 

Tuition charges 20 



Ulrich, Roger 47, 54 

Underground electric 

cables 41, 78 

University-Church 

relations 68, 71 

Vandervoort, Alleyne 53 

VanderWaal, John 54 

Vestuto, Anthony 53 

Walker, Everette 5, 51-52, 54 

Wantland, Evelyn 53 

Wantland, Wayne 9, 53 

Ward, Ruth 5,60 

Washburn, P. A 38 

Watson, Elmo 33,36 

Weir, Benjamin 38 

Wesleyana 17 

Westall, John 53 

Westbrook Auditorium 31 

Whikehart, Lewis 9 

White, William 54 

Whitehurst, James 54 

"White Paper" on University- 
Church relations 68-71 

Whitman College 76 

"Why Illinois Wesleyan 

University?" 58-60 

Wilder Field 41 

Williams, Louis L 16 

Willis, Maurice 9 

Wilson, Raymond 54 

Wolff.Peter 54 

York, Owen 9 

Yousri, Abbas 53 



94 



95 



96